mu 



m 



H 






IBf 




*o 



Oass_J_ 

Book i 

1915" 



A HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING THE 

SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 

THE IMPROVEMENT OF CERTAIN RIVERS 

AND HARBORS. 




WASHINGTON 

GOVEENMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1915 



annual report of the chief of engineers, 1915 
Appendix 



U . S , OOVmvj , C*\i<L^ 



A HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING THE 

SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 

THE IMPROVEMENT OF CERTAIN RIVERS 

AND HARBORS. 




WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1915 






D. of D. 
FEB 18 1916 



w 






APPENDIX 

TO THE 

ANNUAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, 
U. S. ARMY, 

FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1915, 

BEING 

A HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING THE SCOPE OF PREVIOUS 

PROJECTS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF CERTAIN 

RIVERS AND HARBORS. 



8373°— eng 1915 109 1729 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE PORTLAND, 
ME., DISTRICT. 



1. ST. CROIX RIVER, ME. 

About 1856 three piers were built at the ledge 3.5 miles below 
Calais by the Lighthouse Establishment to prevent vessels descend- 
ing the river on ebb tide from being thrown on the ledge. 

The river and harbor act of June 23, 1866, directed an examination 
at St. Croix River above the ledge, and the river and harbor act of 
March 2, 1867, made an appropriation of $15,000, with the proviso 
that " The Province of New Brunswick shall contribute and pay to 
the proper disbursing officer a like sum for said purpose, said pay- 
ment being made on condition that in no event shall the Province of 
New Brunswick be called upon for more than half the sum actually 
expended for said purpose." The annual report for 1867 contained 
an estimate of $88,000 as the cost of a channel 100 feet wide and 10 
feet deep at low water. In 1868 the estimate was increased to 
$99,000, and in 1871 to $100,000. The river and harbor act of March 
3, 1873, carried an appropriation of $10,000 and the river and harbor 
act of June 23, 1874, an additional $10,000, making a total of $35,000. 
The Dominion of Canada made an appropriation of $25,000. In the 
annual report for 1875 a project for a channel 9 feet deep at mean 
low water, 200 feet wide up to Todds Ledge, and 100 feet wide thence 
to the toll bridge, was estimated to cost $200,000. In 1874 the min- 
ister of public works of the Dominion of Canada refused his consent 
to the expenditure of Canadian funds until satisfied that there would 
be no further deposits of mill waste to again close the channel. In 
1877 the estimated cost of the project was put at $150,000. The 
river and harbor act of March 3, 1879, made the unexpended balance, 
amounting to $34,000, available for another locality (Lubec Channel). 

A resolution of the House of Representatives, December 15, 1880, 
requested information as to the condition of the breakwater (piers), 
the necessity for repair, and the probable cost. The report (H. Ex. 
Doc. No. 27, 46th Cong., 3d sess.) represented the piers as in bad 
condition and submitted an estimate of $4,000 as the cost of rebuild- 
ing them. The river and harbor act of March 3, 1881, appropriated 
$4,000, and the work was accomplished the same year. 

Under the provisions of the river and harbor act of August 11, 
1888, a new survey was made, and the report (H. Ex. Doc. No. 89, 
51st Cong., 1st sess.) submitted a project for a channel 12 feet deep 
at mean low water, generally 200 feet wide, but narrowed to 150 
feet and 100 feet in the upper part, estimated to cost $280,000. The 
river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, made an appropriation 
of $35,000, "but upon the condition that the Government of the 
Dominion of Canada shall expend a like sum in the improvement of 

1731 



1732 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

said river." No work was done, and under authority contained in 
the river and harbor act of August 18, 1894, the unexpended funds, 
$35,000, were applied to the work of improving Lubec Channel, Me. 

5. CARVERS HARBOR, VINALHAVEN, ME. 

Previous improvement at this locality was based on a report on a 
survey (H. Ex. Doc. No. 301, 53d Cong., 3d sess.), which contained a 
project which was adopted by the river and harbor act of June 3, 
1896. It consisted in dredging an area of about 23 acres, represent- 
ing the greater portion of the main part of the harbor, to the depth 
of 16 feet at mean low tide. The estimated cost was $64,000. Ap- 
propriations aggregated $45,000. The improvement was completed 
in 1903. The total cost was $43,199.70. 

6. PENOBSCOT RIVER, ME. 

The river and harbor act of June 23, 1866, directed an examination 
of the Penobscot River above Hampden, Me. The report (xVnnual 
Report for 1868, p. 863) contained a project for a channel 150 feet 
wide and 12 feet deep at low water at Bangor and for a distance of 
about 3.5 miles below. The work involved the removal of mill waste 
and ledge and was estimated to cost $125,000. The first appropria- 
tion was $15,000 by the river and harbor act of July 11, 1870. In the 
Annual Report for 1871 the channel width was increased to 200 feet 
and the estimated cost to $155,000. The river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1875, which carried an appropriation of $25,000 for work 
under this project, contained a proviso that $10,000 of said sum 
should be expended at or near Bucksport Narrows (18 miles below 
Bangor). Under this authority the middle ground in front of the 
wharves at Bucksport was dredged in the same year to 12 feet at 
mean low water. The Annual Report for 1876 included some addi- 
tional ledge excavation at Bangor and raised the estimated total cost 
to $172,000, exclusive of the Bucksport work. The river and harbor 
act of August 14, 1876, made an appropriation of $10,000, and di- 
rected that $4,000 of said sum should be expended at Bucksport. 
This sum was applied to further dredging on the middle ground, 
but to the depth of 8 feet at mean low water, in 1877. The river and 
harbor act of June 18, 1878, again provided for work at Bucks] xirt 
by making $2,500 of the Penobscot appropriation available for work 
at that place. Under this authority additional dredging was done in 
October, 1878. By the close of the fiscal year 1880 all the work 
projected for Penobscot River had been completed. Appropriations 
aggregated $198,300, which included $300 for survey appropriated 
March 2, 1829, and $16,500 expended at Bucksport. 

The river and harbor act of August 2. 1882. directed a preliminary 
examination of Penobscot River and Bangor Harbor. A survey fol- 
lowed (S. Ex. Doc. No. 44, 48th Cong., 1st sess.). The resulting 
project, which was adopted by the river and harbor act of July 5, 
1884, provided for widening the channel at Bangor 100 feet for a 
length of about 4,500 feet to the depth of 11 feet at extreme low 
water (or 14 feet at mean low water), and to widen the channel near 
Crosbys Narrows so as to give a width of not less than 250 feet and a 



APPENDIX. 1733 

depth of 12 feet at extreme low water. The estimated cost of this 
project was $75,000. The river and harbor act of August 5, 1886, 
directed a preliminary examination of Penobscot River from Bangor 
to Bucksport Narrows. The survey report (H. Ex. Doc. No. 133, 
50th Cong., 1st sess.) suggested a project for a channel depth of 22 
feet at mean low water and a width of not less than 400 feet between 
Winterport and Bucksport, a distance of about 6 miles. The project 
included the construction of five jetties, ranging in length from 920 to 
2,650 feet and for dredging about 500,000 cubic yards of sawmill 
waste. The estimated cost was $365,000, making the estimate for 
the combined project $140,000. This addition to the project was 
adopted by the river and harbor act of August 11, 1888, subject to 
approval by the Secretary of War. The river and harbor act of 
September 19, 1890, directed another examination of Penobscot River. 
A survey was made (H. Ex. Doc. No. 37, 52d Cong., 1st sess.) and a 
project submitted for a further widening of 60 feet at Bangor, for the 
construction of two jetties near Crosbys Narrows and three jetties 
between Winterport and Bucksport, at a total estimated cost of 
$202,000. The river and harbor act of July 13, 1892, made an appro- 
priation of $40,000. 

The project for Penobscot River had now become somewhat com- 
plicated, and in 1893 it was simplified as follows : To widen the chan- 
nel at Bangor to 360 feet and a depth of 11 feet at extreme low 
water, to widen and straighten and deepen the channel near Crosbys 
Narrows and near Sterns Mill to a depth of 12 feet at extreme low 
tide, and to secure a channel depth of 22 feet at mean low tide be- 
tween Winterport and Bucksport. The estimated cost of the entire 
work was placed at $440,000, of which $150,000 had up to that time 
been appropriated. As the channel between Winterport and Bucks- 
port appeared to be deepening from natural causes, the expensive 
jetties were not to be built until proven necessary. By the close of 
the fiscal year 1895 the object of the project had been secured. The 
jetties were not built. The appropriations to that date aggregated 
$348,300 and the total expenditures had been $337,761.57. 

The river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, directed a survey of 
Bangor Harbor and Penobscot River, including mouth of Ken- 
duskeag River. The report (H. Doc. No. 49, 55th Cong., 1st sess.) 
contained a project for dredging a channel 90 feet wide and 2 feet 
deep at extreme low tide in Kenduskeag River from its mouth up to 
Kenduskeag Bridge, a distance of about 2,300 feet, and for deepen- 
ing the harbor of Bangor in front of the Boston and Bangor steam- 
boat wharf to 11 feet at extreme low tide, from the harbor line out, 
involving the removal of ledge. The estimated cost was $28,620.90. 
This project was adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3, 
1899, which appropriated $28,000 for completing the improvement. 
The work was completed in 1901. 

8. ROCKPORT HARBOR, ME. 

The river and harbor act of August 5, 1886, ordered an examina- 
tion of Rockport Harbor. A survey resulted and the report (H. Ex. 
Doc. No. 141, 50th Cong., 1st sess.) contained a project for dredging 
an area about 400 feet by 600 feet in front of the wharves at the 



1734 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

head of the harbor to the depth of 12 feet at mean low tide and for 
removal of a small ledge. The estimated cost was $14,000. The 
project was adopted by the river and harbor act of August 11, 1888. 
The work was completed in August, 1891. The total cost was 
$15,000. 

12. SASANOA RIVER, ME. 

The river and harbor act of March 2, 1867, directed an examina- 
tion of this locality under the title " Gut opposite the city of Bath, 
Maine." A survey was made, the report on which submitted a 
project (Annual Report for 1867, p. 499) for removing a point of 
ledge which obstructed the channel at Upper Hell Gate, about 2 
miles east of Bath ; for removing Boiler Rock, about 75 yards below 
Upper Hell Gate, to 12 feet at mean low tide; and for dredging a 
channel 100 feet wide and 10 feet deep at mean low tide, through the 
bar about midway between Upper Hell Gate and Arrowsic Bridge. 
The estimated cost was $16,500. This project was adopted by the 
river and harbor act of July 11, 1870. By the close of the fiscal year 
1873 the project was completed. The work consisted in ledge exca- 
vation at Upper Hell Gate so as to give a low-water width of 150 
feet, formerly 100 feet; the removal of Boiler Rock to 10 feet at 
mean low tide, and the removal to a depth of 9 feet at mean low tide 
of a ledge extending from Boiler Rock northward toward the shore ; 
the removal of two wrecks lying mid-channel near Upper Hell Gate ; 
and the dredging of a channel 100 feet wide and 10 feet deep at 
mean low tide, through the bar above Upper Hell Gate. The total 
cost was $16,500. 

February 21, 1878, a special report (Annual Report for 1878, p. 
197) as to necessity for further improvement was submitted in re- 
sponse to a resolution of the House of Representatives of February 
13, 1878. The project suggested covered the dredging of the shoal 
above Upper Hell Gate to 12 feet at mean low tide, the widening of 
the passage through Upper Hell Gate, and the removal of a small 
quantity of ledge north and east of Marsh Island. The estimate 
was $17,000. The project was adopted by the river and harbor act 
of June 18, 1878, which appropriated the entire estimated cost. In 
the Annual Report for 1879 additional ledge excavation at Marsh 
Island and the construction of a jetty were added to the project and 
the estimated cost was increased to $35,000. The project was com- 
pleted in September, 1882, at a cost of $29,000, the sum of the appro- 
priations. 

Another survey was made under the provisions of the river and 
harbor act of August 17, 1894. The project (H. Ex. Doc. No. 142, 
53d Cong., 3d sess.) which was estimated to cost $19,000, provided 
for dredging to 12 feet at mean low tide over the shoal at Carletons 
Ledges, a short distance above Upper Hell Gate, to place a beacon 
on the jetty, and to secure a depth of 12 feet at mean low tide for a 
width of 125 feet through the ledges at Upper Hell Gate. This 
project was adopted by the river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, 
which provided the entire estimated cost. The project was com- 
pleted during the fiscal year 1898, at a cost of $11,987.69, and the 
balance carried to the surplus fund. 



APPENDIX. 1735 

13. KENNEBEC RIVER, MB. 

The river and harbor acts of March 2, 1827, May 19, 1828, April 
23, 1830, July 3, 1832, and an act of July 20, 1840, carried appro- 
priations aggregating $13,595.71. The acts specified the object to be 
for removing obstructions at Lovejoys Narrows, a locality in the 
main river east of the upper end of Swan Island, where ledges 
formed a dangerous obstruction to navigation. 

A report (H. Doc. No. 94, 25th Cong., 2d sess.) submitted Septem- 
ber 30, 1837, by Lieut. Col. S. H. Long, Topographical Engineers, 
submitted a project for improvement from Augusta, at the head of 
navigation, downstream to Lovejoys Narrows, the purpose being to 
secure 6 feet at low water from Augusta to Hallowell, 8 feet from 
Hallowell to Gardiner, and from 8 to 10 feet from Gardiner to Love- 
joys Narrows. The estimated cost was $25,000. In 1845 or 1846 the 
citizens of Augusta expended $9,500 in an attempt to dredge a 
channel from Augusta to Shepards Point, a short distance below 
Hallowell. Some benefit is said to have been secured, though the 
design was not effectually carried out. The river and harbor act of 
August 30, 1852, appropriated $6,000 for improving the Kennebec 
River from the United States arsenal wharf in Augusta, Me., to 
Lovejoys Narrows. The annual report for 1853 contained an esti- 
mate of $13,000 to $17,000 as the cost of securing a channel from 
7 to 8.5 feet deep at low water and from 70 to 100 feet wide. 

The river and harbor act of June 23, 1866, appropriated $20,000 
for the improvement of the river between Shepards Point and the 
city of Augusta, and the same act directed an examination of the 
river above Gardiner. The project for improvement between Augusta 
and Shepards Point (Annual Report for 1867) was to secure 7 feet 
at low water from Augusta to Hallowell and 8 feet from Hallowell 
to Shepards Point, the width to be 75 feet on the bottom. The esti- 
mated cost was $50,000. The river and harbor act of March 2, 1867, 
appropriated $30,000 for completing the improvement, making 
$50,000 in all. The survey which followed the examination ordered 
by the act of 1866 submitted a project (Annual Report for 1868) 
for a depth of 6.5 feet at low water from Augusta to Hallowell 
and 7 feet from Hallowell to Gardiner, the width to be 100 feet. The 
estimated cost was $80,000, or $30,000 in addition to the amount 
already appropriated for the section between Augusta and Shepards 
Point. The reduction in depth was due to ledge met above Hallo- 
well. The river and harbor act of March 3, 1871, appropriated 
$10,000, and contained another item of $5,000 for improvement be- 
tween Gardiner and Richmond. The Annual Report for 1871 con- 
tained a project for a depth of 10 feet at mean low tide and a width 
of 100 feet, and for the removal of ledge and bowlders between 
Gardiner and Richmond, at an estimated cost of $13,000. The An- 
nual Report for 1872 contained an additional estimate of $13,500 
for removing certain ledges at Lovejoys Narrows to 12 feet at mean 
low tide. The extent of this work was later increased. All the 
projected work was completed by 1877. The total appropriations 
to this time had been $161,445.71. 

The river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, directed an examination 
of Richmond Harbor on the Kennebec River, Me. A survey was 



1736 EEPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

made, and the report (H. Doc. No. 29, 46th Cong., 3d sess.) sub- 
mitted a project for a channel 150 feet wide and from 10 to 11 feet 
deep at mean low tide west of Swan Island. The work included 
dredging and the construction of wing dams, at an estimated cost of 
$20,500. The sum of $20,000 was appropriated in 1881 and 1882. 
The project was completed in 1883. 

The river and harbor act of August 5, 1880, directed an examina- 
tion of Kennebec River at Bath and from Augusta to lower end of 
Perkins Island. A survey was made and a project submitted (H. 
Ex. Doc. No. 133, 50th Cong., 1st sess.) for securing a width of 100 
feet and a depth of 8 feet at low water from Augusta to a point 
midway between Hallowell and Gardiner; a width of 125 feet and 
depths of 8 feet and 10 feet at low water, thence to Gardiner; for 
removing ledge at Lovejoys Narrows; for constructing an extensive 
jetty at Beef Rock Shoal at the foot of Swan Island and three 
smaller jetties west of Swan Island; and for removing a rock at 
Bath. The project was estimated to cost $110,500, and was adopted 
by the river and harbor act of August 11, 1888. The Annual Report 
for 1891 increased the estimate to $428,500, due to the necessity for 
dredging at Beef Rock and Hatchs Rock Shoals. In August, 1892, 
the project was revised, and in the Annual Report for 1893 it is 
stated as follows : For a channel depth of 13 feet up as far as Sands 
Island, 12 feet from thence to Hinckley Shoal, and 10 feet from 
thence to Augusta; a steamboat channel, 9 feet deep, west of Swan 
Island; and the removal of old bridge piers at Hallowell; all depths 
being referred to mean low tide. The estimated cost of the project 
was set at $388,500. This project was essentially completed in 1898. 
Appropriations amounted to $330,000. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, ordered an examina- 
tion of Kennebec River between Gardiner Bridge and Augusta Dam, 
about 6.5 miles. A survey was made and a project submitted (H. 
Doc. No. 262, 56th Cong., 1st sess.). Some shoaling had occurred, 
and it was proposed to secure a width of 125 feet to a depth of 11 
feet at mean low water, corresponding to 16 feet at mean high water, 
to remove a small middle ground opposite Farmingdale and a small 
shoal at the entrance to the draw at Gardiner Bridge. The cost was 
estimated at $81,000. This project was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of June 13, 1902, and was placed under the continuing- 
contract s}*stem. The project was completed in 1908. 

The appropriations for the foregoing projects aggregated $592,- 
445.71 and the expenditures $590,411.03. 

14. PORTLAND HARBOR, ME. 

The first work for improvement of Portland Harbor was based 
upon a survey made in 1832 by Lieut. Col. John Anderson. Topo- 
graphical Engineers. His report (H. Doc. Xo. 191. 23d Cong.. 1st 
sess.) suggested two breakwaters — one extending from a point on 
the south side of the entrance to the inner harbor out to Stain ford 
Ledge at an estimated cost of $44,417.08 and the other extending 
from the easterly point of the city out on to the middle ground at an 
estimated cost of $50,435.20. The object of the breakwaters was to 
protect the wharf front from seas and undertow, and it was also 
expected that by controlling the tidal flow the tendency to form the 



APPENDIX. 1737 

shoal known as the middle ground at the entrance to the inner har- 
bor would be reduced. 

The river and harbor act of July 4, 1836, authorized the break- 
water to Stamford Ledge and made the first appropriation $10,000. 
The breakwater was constructed extending for a length of about 
1,900 feet in a northeasterly direction and nearly parallel to the 
wharf line on the opposite, or Portland, side of the harbor. By river 
and harbor act of June 23, 1866, Congress authorized the extension 
of the breakwater, which was completed to a total length of about 
2,000 feet by July 1, 1874. 

By joint resolution of June 5, 1868, Congress authorized the un- 
expended balance of the breakwater appropriation to be expended 
in excavating the middle ground near said breakwater and in other- 
wise protecting the channel. The project adopted under this au- 
thority was to dredge a channel 300 feet wide and 20 feet deep at 
mean low tide through the southern slope of the middle ground and 
to remove the lower end of the bar off the Grand Trunk wharves to 
the same depth. In 1870 the width of channel through the middle 
ground was increased to 400 feet and in 1871 to 500 feet. The 
dredging was completed in July, 1872. 

The river and harbor act of June 10, 1872, which appropriated 
funds for the breakwater, which had not yet been completed, pro- 
vided " for the improvement of Portland Harbor and Back Bay." 
The project adopted for Back Cove consisted in dredging a channel 
100 feet wide and 8 feet deep at mean low tide, for a distance of 
about 900 feet up to the stone-shed wharves. This work was ac- 
complished in 1873-74. 

In December, 1872, the district officer recommended to the Chief 
of Engineers that additional dredging be done in the main harbor. 
After an appropriation of $50,000 made by the river and harbor act 
of March 3, 1873, dredging to 16 feet at mean low tide along the 
wharf front of the inner harbor above the middle ground was added 
to the project. This work, together with some additional dredging 
in front of the Grand Trunk wharves, was completed in 1875, except 
for some dredging along the wharf front above Merrill's wharf, 
which was deferred because several wharves projected beyond the 
harbor commissioner's line. In 1881, with funds then available, 
the 16-foot depth along the wharf front was extended a short dis- 
tance upstream to the lower of the projecting wharves, and an area 
in front of Atlantic wharf, farther down the harbor, was dredged 
to 21 feet at mean low tide. In the same year an estimate of $160,000 
was made for removing the middle ground to 21 feet below mean low 
tide. Congress made an appropriation of $20,000 by the river and 
harbor act of March 3, 1881, and the work was commenced. It was 
completed in 1885. The total expenditures to June 30, 1885, were 
$427,929.21. In 1886-87 a small amount of dredging was done in 
removing shoals in the upper harbor and in extending the 21-foot 
depth up to Franklin Wharf. 

In 1886 a plan was submitted for dredging a channel in Back Cove 
300 feet wide and 12 feet deep at mean low tide, for a distance of 
about 5,600 feet, following the harbor commissioner's line, the esti- 
mated cost being $180,000. Congress made the first appropriation 
August 5, 1886. The work was carried on separately until 1896, 



1738 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

when it was combined with the project for Portland Harbor. It was 
completed in 1899. 

In the same year — 1886 — a project was proposed for a channel 500 
feet wide and 29 feet deep at mean low tide, extending about 3,000 
feet from the 29-foot contour at the entrance up to the lower wharves. 
The cost was estimated at $135,000. The river and harbor act of 
August 5, 1886, appropriated $30,000. In 1890 a small amount of 
dredging along the wharf front in the upper part of the harbor, to 
16 feet at mean low tide, was included with the project. The project 
was completed in 1893, but in February, 1894, a small extension of 
the 29-foot area, and a cut about 1,700 feet long, 320 feet wide, and 
25 feet deep at mean low tide, connecting the 29-foot channel with 
deep water in the upper harbor, was added without increase in the 
estimated cost. This work was completed late in 1894. 

By the river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, Congress adopted a 
project for dredging to 30 feet at mean low tide over the greater 
part of the inner harbor. This included an area about 9,000 feet 
long, with a width of about 650 feet at the upper end and about 
2,000 feet at the lower end, exclusive of the 29-foot dredging done 
under the project of 1886. The estimated cost was $770,000. The 
same act placed the work under the continuing-contract system, and 
combined with it the unfinished project for Back Cove. The limit 
of cost was fixed at $830,000. The work in Back Cove was completed 
in 1899, and that in the main harbor in 1902, at a total cost about 
$253,000 less than the estimate. The sundry civil act of March 3, 
1905, authorized an amendment to the project of 1896, by which the 
30-foot channel was to be continued up Fore River about 8,000 feet, 
as far as the Boston & Maine Railroad bridge, and a channel of the 
same depth, about 5,400 feet long, leading up to Back Cove, was 
to be dredged. The width in each case was to be about 300 feet. 
The act provided that the total cost should not exceed the limit set 
by the act of June 3, 1896. The amended project was completed in 
1908. 

15. SACO RIVER, ME. 

The river and harbor act of March 2, 1827, appropriated $7,000 for 
the erection of piers, placing beacons or buoys, and removing obstruc- 
tions at and near the entrance into the harbor of Saco in the State 
of Maine. It appears that $5,000 was appropriated for a similar 
purpose in 1824, so that from 1824 to 1827 the sum of $12,000 was 
applied to this work. Twelve piers of timber and stone were built, 
10 in the river to facilitate navigation by sailing vessels and 2 out- 
side the mouth designed to create a channel through the bar. 

The river and harbor act of June 23, 1866, appropriated $10,000 
for continuing the repair of the piers. A project was submitted by 
Lieut. Col. B. S. Alexander, Corps of Engineers, October 16, 1866, 
suggesting the construction of a breakwater 2,915 feet long on the 
north side of the mouth of the river and the removal of a small rock. 
The estimated cost of the breakwater was $192,500. In the annual 
report for 1867 the estimated cost of the project is put at $270,000. 
In 1868 the project was described as the construction of a breakwater 
at the mouth of the river, the removal of sunken rocks, and the re- 
building of some of the most important piers in the river. The 
annual report for that year suggested an extension of the breakwater 



APPENDIX. 1739 

about 800 feet and raised the estimated cost of the project to $320,000. 
The project was completed in 1874. and included the construction of 
the breakwater for a length of 4,200 feet to a height of 10 feet above 
mean low water, the removal of sunken rocks from the channel near 
Little Islands, dredging a channel at Saco and Biddeford to 5 feet 
at mean low water, placing a spindle to mark the foot of Cow Island 
Ledge, and building three new piers and repairing one old one. The 
total cost was $162,271.75. 

The river and harbor act of August 2, 1882, ordered a resurvey of 
the breakwater at the mouth of Saco River. The report (S. Ex. Doc. 
No. 44, 48th Cong., 1st sess.) recommended the repair of the break- 
water and its extension 2,200 feet to Sharps Ledge, the building of a 
jetty about 3,000 feet long on the south side of the mouth of the 
river, and dredging a channel 200 feet wide and 5 feet deep at 
mean low water between the breakwater and jetty. The cost was 
estimated at $356,500. The river and harbor act of July 5, 1884, 
appropriated $15,000 for improving breakwater at the mouth of Saco 
River, Me. : Continuing improvement and repairs. The same act 
ordered an examination of Saco River. The survey report (H. Ex. 
Doc. No. 37, 49th Cong., 1st sess.) suggested improvement with the 
object of securing a channel 6 feet at mean low tide from Saco and 
Biddeford to the mouth of the river, a distance of about 5 miles. The 
work was to include dredging, ledge excavation, the construction of 
two jetties, and the repair and removal of piers, at an estimated cost 
of $50,000. This project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
August 5, 1886, which appropriated $12,500. 

The river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, combined the last 
two projects and made an appropriation of $65,000 for continuing 
improvement, including breakwater and the construction of a pro- 
posed jetty opposite the same. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1909, ordered another exami- 
nation of Saco River, as a result of which the existing project, which 
supersedes all others, was adopted. 

The total expenditures under the above projects amounted to 
$346,680.12. The extension of the breakwater to Sharps Ledge was 
not undertaken. The other items were practically accomplished. 
The breakwater was built for a length of about 4,200 feet and the 
jetty to a length of about 4,200 feet. 

16. HARBOR AT ISLES OF SHOALS, ME., AND N. H. 

According to local historians the first work at this locality was about 
the beginning of the nineteenth century, when one Samuel Haley con- 
structed a short wall extending westwardly from Smuttynose Island 
to Malaga Island. An act approved March 3, 1821, authorizing the 
building of lighthouses, and for other purposes, requested the Presi- 
dent to cause an examination or survey to be made to ascertain the 
expediency and practicability of repairing the sea wall at Smutty- 
nose Island and of building a sea wall between said island and Cedar 
Island. The act also authorized the repair of the aforesaid sea 
wall and appropriated a sum not exceeding $2,500 for that purpose 
and the building of a stone pier on Sunken Rocks in the harbor of 
Portsmouth. The lighthouse act of May 7, 1822, authorized the 
Secretary of the Treasury to provide, by contract, for building a sea 



1740 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, IT. S. ARMY. 

wall or pier between Cedar Island and Smuttynose Island, con- 
formably to the report of the commissioners appointed under the 
provisions of the act of March 3, 1821, and appropriated the sum of 
$11,500. Local history has it that in 1821 the Government recon- 
structed and improved the short wall and built the one between 
Cedar Island and Smuttynose Island. In 1874 it was reported that 
the latter wall or breakwater had been so battered that very little of 
it remained above low water. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, directed an examina- 
tion with a view to building a breakwater from Smuttynose Island 
to Cedar Island. A survey was made and the report (H. Doc. No. 
255, 56th Cong., 1st sess.) proposed to rebuild the breakwater on the 
old site to a height of about 15 feet above mean low tide. The work 
was estimated to require 25,000 tons of stone and to cost $30,000. 
This project was adopted by the river and harbor act of June 13, 
1902, which appropriated the entire estimated cost. The work was 
completed in 1904. It cost $28,201.60. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE BOSTON, MASS., 
DISTRICT. 



2. MERRIMAC RIVER, MASS. 

The original project was adopted by the act of May 23, 1828, and 
was for removing the sand bar at or near the mouth of Merrimac 
River by erecting piers or other works. Under this project $67,466.72 
was expended prior to 1850 in removing sand bars and building and 
repairing a breakwater at the mouth of the river. The river at the 
mouth was subsequently improved under separate project for t; Im- 
proving harbor at Newburyport, Mass." 

The river and harbor act of July 11, 1870, as extended by the 
river and harbor act of June 23, 1874, was for improvement of the 
river above the mouth, excavating a channel, and removing obstruc- 
tions at upper and low T er Mitchells Falls (above Haverhill) ; remov- 
ing Gangway and other rocks in Newburyport Harbor and a wreck 
near the mouth of the river. These projects were completed by 
June 30, 1894, at an expenditure of $182,000. 

The river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, made an appropriation 
of $5,000 for removing "certain rocks below Rocks Bridge," and the 
work was completed in the same year at an expenditure of $5,000. 

4. GLOUCESTER HARBOR, MASS. 

The original project as adopted by the river and harbor act of 
June 10, 1872, and extended by the river and harbor acts of August 
11, 1888, September 19, 1890, and June 3. 1896. was for clearing the 
inner harbor of obstructing rocks and shoals, dredging the water 
front from Fort Point to Pews Wharf, a distance of 3.900 feet, to the 
depth of 15 feet ,and Harbor Cove to the depth of 10 feet at mean low 
water; completed at an expenditure of $87,681.65. 



APPENDIX. 1741 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of August 18, 
1891, provided for the construction of a rubblestone breakwater, sur- 
mounted by a superstructure of dry walls of heavy split stone inclos- 
ing a core of rubblestone, from Eastern Point over Dog Bar to Round 
Rock Shoal, at an estimated cost of $752,000 (H. Ex. Doc. No. 56, 
48th Cong., 2d sess., no map; Annual Report for 1885, p. 534). The 
liver and harbor act of June 13, 1902, authorized the termination of 
the breakwater at Cat Ledge and the application of any remaining 
balance " toward the work of removing Round Rock," at a reduced 
estimate of $416,083.43. Under that authority the breakwater was 
completed in 1905 as far as Cat Ledge, a length of 2,250 feet, at a 
cost of $410,097.19. In addition, $16,004.16 was spent for mainte- 
nance. 

Upon a subsequent examination of Round Rock Shoal it was found 
that the cost of removing it to the level of the surrounding bottom, ex- 
ceeding $800,000, was disproportionate to the probable benefits to navi- 
gation. The project has been reviewed by the Board of Engineers for 
Rivers and Harbors, which recommends return to the original proj- 
ect of 1894 for a breakwater from Eastern Point to Round Rock 
Shoal, and its views are concurred in. The total cost of the extension 
is estimated at $354,000. 

5. BEVERLY HARBOR, MASS. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
June 13, 1902, and was to widen the channel from Monument Bar 
beacon to a point about 200 feet east of Rams Horn beacon to a width 
of 200 feet, with a depth of 18 feet at mean low water, at an esti- 
mated cost of $10,000 (H. Doc. No. 129, 56th Cong., 2d sess., no map; 
Annual Report for 1901, p. 1065). This project was completed by 
1904, except at three points where ledges restricted the width to 106 
feet, at a cost of $8,272.10. These three ledges were removed under 
the project adopted by the river and harbor act of March 2, 1907. 

6. SALEM HARBOR, MASS. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1873, and was to dredge a channel of approach to the mouth 
of South River, 1,730 feet long, 300 feet wide, and 8 feet deep at 
mean low water, at an estimated cost of $32,000. The work was es- 
sentially completed April 20, 1875, at a cost of $25,000. 

The river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, provided for clear- 
ing out the channel of approach to South River to the original dimen- 
sions as dredged in 1873-75 — 300 feet wide at the entrance and 150 
feet wide off Derby Wharf Light, 8 feet deep at mean low water — and 
for extending the channel with same depth up South River, reducing 
its width gradually to 100 feet near the inner end of Derby Wharf, 
and from that point excavating a channel 50 feet wide and 6 feet 
deep at mean low water to the head of navigation, at an estimated 
cost of $28,000 (H. Ex. Doc. No. 28, 51st Cong., 1st sess., with map). 
This improvement was completed in June, 1894, at a cost of $27,368.66. 



1742 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 
7. LYNN HARBOR, MASS. 

The original project for improvement of Lynn Harbor was sub- 
mitted December 31, 1881, in accordance with the requirements of the 
river and harbor act of March 3, 1881, and is printed in Senate Ex- 
ecutive Document No. 45, Forty-seventh Congress, first session, and 
in Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year ending 
June 30, 1882, page 544. An appropriation of $G0,000 was made by 
the river and harbor act of August 2, 1882. Modifications of the 
project were defined in a report of the Board of Engineers for Forti- 
fications and for River and Harbor Improvements, dated April 10, 
1884, and approved by the Secretary of War April 21, 1884. (Printed 
in Annual Report for 1884, p. 524.) Further modifications were 
adopted in September, 1888, at which time the project was for a 
channel 200 feet wide and 10 feet deep at mean low water from the 
sea (at White Rocks) to a deep basin opposite Little Nahant, a dis- 
tance of about 3,300 feet, and for a channel of the same width and 
depth and 6,900 feet long from the basin nearly opposite Sand Point 
to a point 400 feet inside the harbor line, and an anchorage basin 500 
feet by 300 feet and 10 feet deep at mean low water ; the upper part 
of the channel to be maintained by occasional dredging and the lower 
part by a training wall joining the land at Little Nahant, at an esti- 
mated cost of $182,000. The project was completed August 25, 1897, 
except the training wall, the necessity for which was not apparent, 
at an expenditure of $117,063.56. 

The river and harbor act of July 13, 1892, appropriating $10,000 
for Lynn Harbor, provided that the whole or any portion of the 
appropriation might be expended on the western channel (the chan- 
nel leading to the mouth of Saugus River). Under this authority 
$5,000 was expended in obtaining in 1893 a channel 8 feet deep at 
mean low water and 150 feet wide for an aggregate length of 2.200 
feet. Deterioration having occurred, the channel was redredged to 
its former dimensions in the fiscal year 1913, at an expenditure of 
$6,400 from allotments from appropriation provided by the river and 
harbor act of March 2, 1907, for emergencies in rivers and harbors. 

The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, provided for a channel 
200 feet wide and 4,500 feet long from the sea to the deep basin op- 
posite Little Nahant ; from the basin nearly opposite Sand Point, a 
distance of 7,000 feet, to the anchorage basin, and the anchorage 
basin itself, 500 feet by 300 feet, all to the depth of 15 feet at mean 
low water, at an estimated cost of approximately $162,937. (H. Doc. 
No. 78, 56th Cong., 2d sess., with map; Annual Report for 1901, p. 
1092.) 

This project was completed in May, 1908, at an expenditure of 
$164,373.44. In addition $2,000 was expended for maintenance. 

8. MYSTIC AND MALDEN RIVERS AND MYSTIC RIVER BELOW THE 
MOUTH OF ISLAND END RIVER, MASS. 

(b) MALDEN RIVER. 

The original project was proposed in 1880. It contemplated a chan- 
nel 100 feet wide and 12 feet deep at mean high water up to the 
Charles Street Bridge, at an estimated cost of $35,000. In 1882 the 



APPENDIX. 1743 

project was modified to secure a channel 12 feet deep at mean high 
water with a width of 100 feet up to the first drawbridge (Medford 
Street), thence 75 feet wide to the second drawbridge (Charles 
Street), at an estimated cost of $40,000, increased in 1884 to $47,000. 
The river and harbor act of August 2, 1882, appropriated $10,000 in 
furtherance of the improvement, which was expended in 1883 and 
1884 in securing a channel with a least width of 50 feet (70 feet at 
turns) and depth of 12 feet at mean high water from the mouth to 
the Medford Street Bridge at Maiden, a distance of 1.6 miles. No 
further appropriations were made until the river and harbor act of 
July 13, 1892. A channel 100 feet wide and 12 feet deep at mean 
high water was completed in 1897 to the Medford Street Bridge (the 
local officer having reported the river above that bridge to be un- 
worthy of improvement by the United States). The expenditures 
were, to June 30, 1915, $24,986.39 for improvement and $44,763.61 
for maintenance. 

(c) MYSTIC RIVER BELOW THE MOUTH OF ISLAND END RIVER. 

The original project, adopted by the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1899, was for a channel 25 feet deep at mean low water and 
300 feet wide from the mouth of the river in Boston Harbor, about 
1 mile below the Chelsea Bridge, to a point 800 feet above the mouth 
of Island End River, at an estimated cost of $321,445.52. (H. Doc. 
No. 178, 55th Cong., 3d sess.) The estimate was reduced to $267,547.50 
in 1899 as a result of a new survey made in the summer of that year. 

The project was modified by the river and harbor act of June 25, 

1910, in accordance with plan printed in House Document No. 1086, 
Sixtieth Congress, second session, by providing for the abandon- 
ment of the proposed 800-foot extension above the mouth of Island 
End River. The project as modified was completed in February, 

1911, at an expenditure of $125,723.20. In addition, $10,281.92 was 
spent for maintenance. 

The portion of the 25-foot project above Chelsea Bridge has been 
superseded by the 30-foot channel in Mystic River and the portion 
below the bridge by the 35-foot channel in Boston Harbor. 

9. BOSTON HARBOR, MASS. 

The original project, adopted by the act of March 2, 1825, was 
" for the preservation of the islands in Boston Harbor necessary to 
the security of that place," and to this end sea walls have been built 
and are being maintained on Great Brewster Island, Lovells Island, 
Gallops Island, Long Island Head, Rainsford Island, Deer Island, 
and Georges Island, and on Point Allerton. In all, about 3.75 miles 
of wall have been built. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of March 2, 1867, 
was (as modified) to make the main ship channel from Nantasket 
Roads to Boston 23 feet deep at mean low water, 600 feet wide 
through the Narrows to President Roads, and 1,000 feet wide from 
President Roads to Boston. The project appears to have been com- 
pleted by 1892, at which time the channel was 23 feet deep at mean 



1744 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

low water from Nantasket Roads to Boston, with a least width of 
625 feet in the Narrows and 850 feet between President Roads and 
the city. In 1883 a channel was dredged through the bar, which ex- 
tends from the north head of Long Island to Nixes Mate Shoal, 200 
feet wide and 12 feet deep at mean low water, and about 550 feet 
long, and in 1892 this channel was Avidened to 300 feet and deepened 
to 15 feet at mean low water. 

All expenditures to 1866, amounting to $546,526.10, appear to have 
been applied to the building and repair of sea walls. The expendi- 
tures since that time on the sea walls and the 23-foot channel project 
amount to $1,981,307.06. but the amounts applied to sea walls and 
the 23-foot channel project separately are not obtainable from the 
records at the present time. The aggregate of all expenditures on 
the projects for sea walls and 23-foot channel to June 30, 1915, is 
$2,527,833.16. 

The project for a channel (known as the Nantasket Beach Chan- 
nel) 100 feet wide and 9^ feet deep at mean low water from the 
mouth of Weir River to the steamboat wharf at Nantasket Beach, 
including the removal of a few bowlders at the mouth of the river 
and ledge near the wharf, was adopted by a proviso in the river and 
harbor act of June 14, 1880, and completed in 1883. Under a pro- 
viso in the river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, the channel 
was widened to 150 feet in 1891. In 1893 it was deepened to 12 feet 
at mean low water. The total expenditures were $33,820.76. 

An extension of the main ship channel from near the Grand Junc- 
tion Wharf (at East Boston) toward Jeffries Point, known as Jeffries 
Point Channel, was provided for in the river and harbor act of Sep- 
tember 19, 1890. A channel 400 feet wide from Grand Junction 
Wharf to just east of Simpson's Patent Dry Docks, and 18 feet deep 
at mean low water, thence gradually narrowing to 250 feet and de- 
creasing in depth to 15 feet at mean low water to a junction with the 
same depth off Jeffries Point, at an estimated cost of $50,000, was 
completed in 1893 at a cost of $47,743.75. 

A project for the improvement of Charles River was adopted by 
a proviso in the river and harbor act of June 14, 1880. It was to 
widen and deepen the natural channel so that at mean low water it 
should be, from its mouth to Western Avenue Bridge. 200 feet wide 
and not less than 7 feet deep, thence to Market Street Bridge 80 feet 
wide and 6 feet deep; thence to the dam 60 feet wide and 2 feet deep, 
a total distance of 9 miles, at an estimated cost of $85,000 (S. Ex. 
Doc. No. 29, 45th Cong., 3d sess.; Annual Report for 1879, pp. 290- 
294). The estimate was increased to $125,000 in 1881 (Annual Re- 
port for 1881, pp. 516, 517). A channel of the projected dimensions 
was completed in 1884 to the Arsenal Street (now called Western 
Avenue) Bridge, being about 40 per cent of the whole project. The 
expenditures were $57,500. Funds in hand were carried to the sur- 
plus fund, pursuant to section 10 of the sundry civil act approved 
March 4, 1909. No further improvement is contemplated. 

A project for the improvement of Chelsea Creek (upper) was 
adopted by a proviso in the river and harbor act of June 3. 1896, and 
was to make the channel about 5,500 feet in length next below the 
head of navigation, 150 feet wide and 18 feet deep at mean high 



APPENDIX. 1745 

water, at an estimated cost of $65,000 (H. Ex. Doc. No. 162, 53d 
Cong., 3d sess., with map; Annual Report for 1895, p. 648). The 
project was completed in 1907. The expenditures to date are $73,- 
071.49 for new work and $816.89 for maintenance. 

The project for improvement of Fort Point Channel was adopted 
by the river and harbor act of August 5, 1886, and was for a channel 
175 feet wide and 23 feet deep at mean low water from the entrance 
about 4.190 feet to near Federal Street Bridge, at an estimated cost of 
$100,000 (H. Ex. Doc. No. 206, 48th Cong., 2d sess., without map; 
Annual Report for 1885, p. 543). The estimate was reduced in 1887 
to $78,750. The project was completed in 1909. The expenditures 
to date are $66,387.13 for new work and $9,514.05 for maintenance. 

The project for the 27-foot channel was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of July 13, 1892, and was to widen the main ship channel 
from Nantasket Roads to Boston, 8£ miles, to 1,000 feet, and to deepen 
it to 27 feet at mean low water, at an estimated cost of $1,250,000 
(for map see p. 554, Annual Report for 1894). The estimate was sub- 
sequently increased to $1,488,751. The project was completed in 
1907. The expenditures to date are $1,414,390.99 for new work and 
$59,946.30 for maintenance. 

The project for the 30-foot channel was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of March 3, 1899, and was to widen the Broad Sound 
Channel, 2 miles long from President Roads to the sea, to 1,200 feet 
and to deepen it to 30 feet at mean low water, at an estimated cost 
of $455,000 (H. Doc. No. 133, 55th Cong., 2d sess., with map; Annual 
Report for 1898, p. 886). The project was completed in 1905. The 
expenditures to date are $385,200 for new work and $69,800 for main- 
tenance. 

11. WEYMOUTH RIVER, MASS. 
(a) WEYMOUTH FORE RIVER. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
September 19, 1890, and was for obtaining for a distance of 7,000 feet 
below the head of navigation a channel with a uniform depth of 6 
feet at mean low water, with a width of 100 feet to near Weymouth 
Landing, 80 feet thence to Braintree Bridge, and 50 feet thence 950 
feet above that bridge, at an estimated cost of $40,000. Completed, 
except removal of four small ledges uncovered by the dredging, and 
maintained to 1906 by the United States. The expenditures were 
$40,000 for improvement and $2,750 for maintenance. The future 
maintenance of this improvement devolves upon the Commonwealth 
of Massachusetts. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, 
embraced that portion of the river extending from its mouth in 
Hingham Bay about 3| miles up to Weymouth Fore River Bridge at 
Quincy Point, and was to dredge a channel about 1 mile long, 300 
feet wide, and 18 feet deep at mean low water up to that bridge, at an 
estimated cost of $57,500. The project was completed in June, 1 907, 
at an expenditure of $55,000. 
8373°— eng 1915 110 



1746 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 
12. PLYMOUTH AND PROVINCETOWN HARBORS, MASS. 
(a) PLYMOUTH HARBOR. 

The original project was adopted by the act of May 26, 1824. and 
was " for repair of Plymouth Beach in the State of Massachusetts, 
and thereby prevent the harbor at that place from being destroyed." 
and all appropriations previous to 1875 appear to have been made for 
that purpose, the expenditures having amounted to $138,131.70 to 

1899, when the present project for beach protection was adopted. 
The original project for dredging was adopted by the river and 

harbor act of March 3, 1875, and was to provide a channel about 2,500 
feet long, 100 feet wide, and 6 feet deep at mean low water from the 
channel in the inner harbor to Long Wharf, at an estimated cost of 
$28,000. The project was modified in 1877 so as to include the dredg- 
ing of a basin about 900 feet long, 150 feet wide, and 8 feet deep at 
mean low water in front of the town wharves, at an estimated cost of 
$13,500; in 1884 to dredge the channel to a depth of 9 feet and widen 
it to 150 feet, rounding off its junctions with the main channel and 
basin, at a cost of $27,000; and in 1885 to deepen the basin to 9 feet, 
at a cost of $22,500. Under the project as modified, a channel 2.286 
feet long, 150 feet wide, and 9 feet deep at mean low water, and a 
basin in front of the town wharves 866 feet long, 150 feet wide, and 
9 feet deep at mean low water were obtained by 1893, at a cost of 
$50,514.89. Maintenance work has been done as follows: In 1899- 

1900, $10,212.63 were expended for redredging channel and basin, 
and in 1903, $3,954.42 for redredging turning basin. 

(b) PROVINCETOWN HARBOR. 

The original project, adopted by the act of May 20, 1826, was " for 
the preservation of the point of land forming Provincetown Har- 
bor," and the project from 1826 continuously to this date has been, by 
building dikes and groins and by other sand-catching devices, to 
arrest the erosion and promote the accretion of the barrier of beach 
and sand dunes which protects and preserves the harbor. To this end 
work consisting of bulkheads of wood and stone, jetties of wood and 
brush, dikes, catch-sand devices, and extensive planting of beach 
grass was done at Beach Point, East Harbor Creek near High Head, 
Cove Section, Oblique Section, at Lanceys Harbor near Abel Hill, 
Wood End, and Long Point. Although in the vicinity of and below 
Wood End the timber structures were partialty successful in ac- 
cumulating sand moved by the wind, for the greater part of the dis- 
tance between Abel Hill and Wood End they failed in the long run to 
accomplish their purpose, due to the absence of any great quantity of 
wind-driven sand and to the inability of light timber structures to 
withstand the inroads of the sea. The expenditures were $215,800.44 
for improvement. 



APPENDIX. 1747 

HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE NEWPORT, R. I., 
DISTRICT. 



2. HYANNIS HARBOR, MASS. 

The earliest project was that adopted by the act of March 2, 1827, 
which provided for the construction of a breakwater to be built about 
seven-tenths of a mile from shore in an east-southeast direction. This 
made available to vessels passing through Nantucket and Vineyard 
Sounds the deep water to the north of the breakwater where the shore 
line became reentrant and afforded natural protection from storms 
other than those from a southerly direction. The work of construct- 
ing the breakwater was begun in 182S and continued with but little 
interruption till 1837, when it was suspended, though unfinished, and 
nothing further was done till 1853. The substructure was riprap 
granite and sloped, and the superstructure was a vertical wall. This 
construction proved inadequate to withstand severe storms, and be- 
tween the years 1852-1882 extensive repairs, increasing the width of 
base, sloping its vertical faces, and raising it to its projected height, 
were made. 

At the completion of these, the breakwater was 1,170 feet long and 
about 10 feet high above mean low water, covering an anchorage area 
of about 175 acres, the entrance to which had a depth of about 15.5 
feet. The sum of $123,431.82 had been expended on this project. 

3. HARBOR OF REFUGE AT NANTUCKET, MASS. 

The earliest project was that adopted by the act of March 2, 1827, 
which provided for dredging a channel through the outer bar, a bar 
which had formed across the entrance to the harbor and over which 
was a least depth of 6 feet at mean low water. Operations were in 
progress during a part of the years 1829, 1830, and 1831. Just how 
these were carried on is not known, but they proved ineffectual, one 
storm nearly filling up the dredged channel. The project was aban- 
doned and nothing further was attempted in this direction. At the 
time this improvement was undertaken the whaling industry of Nan- 
tucket had reached large proportions, and the volume of the industry 
steadily increased until in 1846 it had reached a total of 63 whalers 
with a total tonnage of 24,661 tons. The cost of the work under this 
improvement was $45,734.45. 

4. WOODS HOLE CHANNEL, MASS. 

The original project was that of 1852, for which an appropriation 
of $2,500 was made for the improvement of Great Woods Hole Har- 
bor. (The term hole on this part of the coast was applied generally 
by the first navigators to a shelter or harbor and not to a passage- 
way.) This was spent in building a breakwater on its northern side 
to close a passage through which water-bearing sediment passed be- 
tween it and Buzzards Bay. The report of this operation is found 
in the Annual Eeport of the Chief of Engineers for 1853. It would 



1748 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

appear the work was left incomplete, as an additional appropriation 
of $2,000 was solicited but not made. Private parties, however, con- 
tinued the work and effectually closed the passage. 

The next project was that adopted in 1879, with modifications in 
1882, which provided for making a channel through the bar at the 
entrance to Little Harbor, deepening and widening the channel 
through the strait, and for building retaining walls on shore, a stone 
pier, and a wooden wharf, mainly for the use of the United States 
Fish Commission and incidentally for the use of other branches of 
the public service. The channel through the bar at the entrance to 
Little Harbor was deepened from 7£ feet to 10 feet, and later to 12 
feet, at mean low water and 130 feet wide, and the channel through 
the strait was deepened to 9 feet at mean low water. The retaining 
walls on shore r stone pier, and wooden wharf were built for the use 
of the Fish Commission, the whole at a total cost of $113,599.92, of 
which $108,599.92 was for new work and $5,000 for maintenance. 

5. NEW BEDFORD AND FAIRHAVEN HARBORS, MASS. 

The original project adopted by the act of 1836 provided for the 
removal of a wreck and the dredging of a sand bar which had been 
formed by it. The sum of $10,000 was expended on this work. The 
project adopted by the act of March 3, 1875, provided for dredging 
a channel from the deep water near Palmers Island obliquely across 
the harbor to the wharves of New Bedford. It had a length of 
about 4,000 feet, width of 200 feet, and depth of 15 feet at mean low 
water. The sum of $20,000 was expended under this project. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of August 11, 
1888, and its modifications, provided for dredging a channel 200 
feet wide from the deep water in Buzzards Bay to New Bedford 
Harbor, thence along the city wharf front 150 feet wide below and 
above the New Bedford and Fairhaven Bridge, an anchorage area 
about one-half mile long and 600 feet wide on the northerly side 
of the main channel between New Bedford and Fairhaven, and a 
channel 250 feet wide leading from the anchorage area through the 
draw in the bridge to the wharves above, with a turning basin at 
the upper end, in which the depth for all was 18 feet at mean low 
water. The channel 200 feet wide had a length of about 2 miles, 
the 150-foot width nine-tenths mile, and the 250-foot width five- 
tenths mile. This work was completed in 1906 at a total cost of 
$137,709. 

6. TAUNTON RIVER, MASS. 

The original project adopted by the act of July 11, 1870, provided 
for deepening the channel to 9 feet mean high water by dredging 
and rock removal. Xhe greater part of this work was done in the 
section of the river between Burts Turn and Weir Bridge, in which 
were numerous shoals. The width of the channel under improve- 
ment varied from 60 to 70 feet, the former being the prevailing 
width. The work of removing the rock, which consisted of bowlders. 
was carried on at various points, chiefly at Peters Point, just above 
Dighton, at the Nook below Berkley Bridge, and at the Needles 
above the bridge. This work was completed in 1879 at a total cost of 
$63,000. 



APPENDIX. 1749 

7. FALL RIVER HARBOR, MASS. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
June 23, 1874, and provided for a channel 100 feet wide and 12 feet 
deep at mean low water, widening out at each end where it joins the 
main channel. Its location was along the wharf front immediately 
north of the Old Colony Steamboat Co.'s wharf where the shore line 
made a sharp inward curve. The channel as finally dredged was 
160 feet wide and 1,500 feet long, with an additional width of 100 
feet with 11 feet depth. A considerable part of this work consisted 
of the removal of bowlders found within the improved area. The 
project was completed in 1878 at a total cost of $30,000. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, 
modified by the river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, provided for 
a channel 300 feet wide and 25 feet deep at mean low water through 
Mount Hope Bay to connect the deep water in the bay with the deep 
water in front of the city and for a channel of the same dimensions 
along the city wharf front between the Old Colony Wharf and the 
deep water at the upper end of the city front, a total distance of 
about 4.6 miles. 

This project was completed in 1907 at a cost of $175,412, since 
which date $20,009.51 has been spent for maintenance, making the 
total cost of the two projects, with maintenance, $225,421.51. 

8. PAWTUCKET (SEEKONK) RIVER, R. I. 

The original project was adopted by the act of March 2, 1867, and 
provided for a channel 75 feet wide and 7 feet deep at low water. 
The improvement covered the section of the river between Butlers 
Point and the wharves at Pawtucket, a distance of about 2.3 miles, 
in which were a number of detached shoals of varying depths. The 
work of their removal was completed in 1876, at which time there 
was a channel 75 feet wide and 7 feet deep between Red Bridge 
and Pawtucket. In some of the shoals where there was a tendency 
to fill the depth was increased to 9 feet. The total cost of the im- 
provement was about $50,000, the balance of $2,000 of the $52,000 
appropriated was held for maintenance work. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of July 5, 1884, 
provided for a channel 100 feet wide and 12 feet deep at mean low 
water from the mouth of the river, at Providence, up to Grant & Co.'s 
wharf in Pawtucket, thence with same depth and 40 feet wide 
through a ledge rock for a short distance farther, to Division 
Street Bridge, the head of navigation. The river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1899, modified this project by straightening that portion of 
the channel between Ten Mile River and Bucklins Island. The esti- 
mated cost of the project in 1883 was $382,500. 

The improvement authorized in 1884 was completed in 1899, at 
which time the sum of $266,391.42 had been spent, and a channel 100 
feet wide, with enlargements at the bends, and 12 feet deep from its 
mouth, at Providence, up to Grant & Co.'s wharf, thence same depth 
and 40 feet wide through a ledge rock to the head of navigation at 
Pawtucket, had been obtained. The actual distance covered by these 
operations was about 3.3 miles. 



1750 REPOKT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

Under the act of March 3, 1899, a channel beginning at a point 
opposite Ten Mile River and running obliquely across the river to 
Phillipsdale, on the east side of the river, and rejoining the main 
channel at Bucklins Island, was dredged to the same depth and 
width as the main channel, at a cost of $16,053.49. This is now a 
part of the main channel. 

9. PROVIDENCE RIVER AND HARBOR, R. I. 

The act of August 30, 1852, appropriated $5,000 for deepening the 
channel at the Crook, a portion of the channel through the harbor 
just below Fox Point, and very crooked. The area covered by the 
improvement was about 150 feet by 810 feet, and the depth was in- 
creased from 44 feet to 9 feet at mean low water. 

The project adopted by the act of March 2, 1867, provided for 
deepening the channel at the Crook to 12 feet at mean low water. 
Subsequently the project was extended so as to include the channel 
through the harbor from Fields Point to Fox Point, a distance of 
about If miles. The channel as completed had a width of about 300 
feet, for which there had been appropriated the total sum of $59,000. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of June 18, 1878 
(S. Ex. Doc. No. 34, 45th Cong., 2d sess.; Annual Report for 1878, p. 
232), modified by the river and harbor act of August 2, 1882 (S. Ex. 
Doc. No. 145, 47th Cong., 1st sess.; Annual Report for 1882, p. 557), 
provided for a channel 300 feet wide and 25 feet deep at mean low 
water from the deep water in Narragansett Bay to Fox Point, Provi - 
dence, for anchorage basins in the harbor of 600 feet width and 20 
feet depth, 900 feet width and 12 feet depth, and 1.060 feet width 
and 6 feet depth, between Fields Point and Fox Point, and the re- 
moval of Bulkhead Rock, all at an estimated cost in 1882 of $675,000. 
This improvement was completed in 1895 and covered a distance of 
about 5i miles, at a total cost of $662,500. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of August 5, 1886 
(S. Ex. Doc. No. 42, 48th Cong., 2d sess. ; Annual Report for 1885, p. 
595), modified by the river and harbor acts of June 13, 1902. and 
March 5, 1905, provided for dredging Green Jacket Shoal to a depth 
of 25 feet at mean low water, limiting the area to be dredged by lines 
drawn 200 feet outside the harbor lines and parallel to them. The 
acts of 1902-1905 merged this project into the general project for 
enlarging the anchorage area of Providence Harbor. The expendi- 
ture, as a separate project, on the removal of this shoal was $1()4._'5<). 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of June 3, i896 
(Annual Report for 1886, p. 62), provided for a ship channel 400 
feet wide and 25 feet deep at mean low water from Sassafras Point, 
in Providence Harbor, through Providence River and Narragansett 
Bay by the most direct route practicable, to the ocean by the way of 
the Western Passage, so called, at an estimated cost of $732,820. The 
contract was put under the continuing-contract svstem, and the 
project was completed in 1904, at a cost of $483,200.87. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, 
modified by the river and harbor act of March 2, 1907 (H. Doc. No. 
108, 56th Cong., 1st sess.), provided for an enlarged anchorage area 
of 25-foot depth, extending the full width of the harbor from Fox 
Point on the north to Long Bed and Sassafras Point on the south, 



APPENDIX. 1751 

including the area known as Green Jacket Shoal, but excluding a 
small area adjacent to the western harbor line, between Harbor 
Junction Pier and Sassafras Point; enlarged by the act of 1907, so 
as to include an area of uniform width and same depth to the east- 
ward of the main ship channel, between Long Bed and Kettle Point, 
at a total estimated cost of $698,528. The project was completed in 
1909, at a total cost of $681,779.48. 

The river and harbor act of June 25, 1910 (H. Doc. No. 606, 61st 
Cong., 2d sess.), adopted the project for extending the 25-foot-deep 
anchorage to the western harbor line, from just above Harbor Junc- 
tion Pier to Fields Point, and for widening the 400-foot wide chan- 
nel to 600 feet of the same depth, from Kettle Point to Gaspee Point, 
with certain easements of bends, at a total estimated cost of $459,000. 
It also contained a proviso that no part of the amount authorized by 
the act shall be expended until the Secretary of War shall have 
received satisfactory assurances that the city of Providence or other 
local agency will expend upon the improvement of the harbor front 
an equal sum. The conditions were all met by the city of Providence 
and the project was completed in 1913, at a cost of $459,000. The 
length covered by this improvement was about 4 miles. 

10. NEWPORT HARBOR, R. I. 

The original project adopted by the act of March 3, 1873, provided 
for the removal of the point of the shoal at the south end of Goat 
Island, and for dredging a channel of practicable width and 15 feet 
deep at mean low water between Goat Island and Lime Rock Light ; 
for a channel 300 feet wide and 12 feet deep from the 12-foot curve 
into Commercial Wharf, then northerly along the new harbor line, 
same depth and 100 feet wide, to a point opposite Bull's wharf, 
about 1,000 feet, thence along same line with a depth of 7 feet to 
Long Wharf , 600 feet ; for the construction of a jetty on Goat Island 
to arrest the sand coming around the island and depositing in the 
adjacent channel, all at an estimated cost of $28,500. This work 
was completed in 1876, except that not all the channel width between 
Goat Island and Lime Eock Light was made because of hardness 
of material, at a total cost of $28,500. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1881, 
as modified and extended by the river and harbor acts of Julv 5, 
1885, July 13, 1892, and August 17, 1894, provided for a channel 
with a least width of 750 feet and 15 feet deep at mean low water, 
from Narragansett Bay around the south end of Goat Island into 
Newport ; for the extensions of the 13-foot and 10-foot deep anchor- 
age basins; for the partial cutting off of the shoal spit at the south- 
erly end of Goat Island and for the construction of jetties on its 
western shore, so as to prevent the erosion of the end of the island, 
and the drift of the sand, etc., around its western shore into the 
adjacent parts of the channel and harbor, and for the removal of 
Spindle Eock, a sharp, rocky spit near Eose Island, all at an esti- 
mated cost of $206,200. This project was completed in 1906, at a 
total cost of $244,695.71, of which $234,695.71 was for original work 
and $10,000 for maintenance. 

The limits of the improvement covered an area of 90 acres within 
the harbor, included in which was a channel 750 feet wide and 15 



1752 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

feet deep at mean low water between Long Wharf and Lime Rock 
Light. The shoal spit at the south end of Goat Island and the 750- 
foot-wide channel at that point had been dredged to 15 feet depth, 
and Spindle Rock had been removed. 

13. HARBOR OF REFUGE AT BLOCK ISLAND, R. I. 

The original project was adopted by the act of July 11, 1870, and 
modified and extended by the river and harbor acts of August 5, 
1886, August 11, 1888, and June 3, 1896, and provided for the con- 
struction of two breakwaters, one running out in a northerly di- 
rection from the shore on the east side, and the other L-shaped 
running out from the shore on the west side of the proposed harbor, 
so as to provide an inner harbor 800 feet square for small vessels, 
and an exterior harbor for larger ones, protected by the east or main 
breakwater which at its outer end curves harborward; also, for 
raising the main breakwater to its projected height and stopping 
sand leaks between certain joints and for dredging to 10 feet depth 
at mean low water, the main inner harbor. This work was completed 
in 1908, at a total cost of $531,219.23 of which $500,764.07 was for 
original work and $30,455.14 for maintenance. 

The main or east breakwater was built a distance of 1,950 feet, 300 
feet of which adjacent to the shore forms the east side of a small 
inner basin. The west breakwater, L-shaped, was built 1,100 feet in 
length, forming two sides of the inner harbor 800 feet square. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE NEW LONDON, 
CONN., DISTRICT. 



1. PAWCATUCK RIVER, R. I. AND CONN. 

The original project and its extensions up to the time of the adop- 
tion of the present project, were not defined in terms by the river 
and harbor acts making the appropriations, but followed plans pre- 
sented in special reports to the Chief of Engineers, funds for the ex- 
ecution of which were subsequently appropriated. The original plan 
for improvement recommended a channel in the river having a depth 
of 5 feet at mean low water and a width of 75 feet, extending from 
Certain Draw Point to Westerly (H. Ex. Doc. No. 60, 41st Cong., 
3d sess., and Annual Report for 1871, p. 743). Funds for the work 
were appropriated by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1871. An 
extension to the project to provide a channel 8 feet in depth at mean 
low water and 100 feet wide, from the lower wharves at Westerly 
down to deep water, and 40 feet in width from the lower to the upper 
wharves, was recommended in a subsequent report (H. Ex. Doc. Xo. 
183, 48th Cong., 2d sess., and Annual Report for 1885, p. 622), and 
funds appropriated by the river and harbor act of August 5, 1886, 
and subsequent acts were applied to this extension. The project was 
also extended to provide a channel through Little Narragansett Bay, 
7-f feet in depth at mean low water and 200 feet in width (H. Ex. 



APPENDIX. 1753 

Doc. Xo. 70, 44th Cong., 1st sess., and Annual Report for 1876, p. 
217), and funds appropriated by the river and harbor act of August 
5, 1886, and subsequent acts were applied to this extension. At the 
time of the adoption of the present project, in 1896, the project then 
existing for the improvement of the Pawcatuck River comprised, 
therefore, a channel 7^ feet deep and 200 feet wide through Little 
Xarragansett Bay; and a channel 8 feet deep and 100 feet wide to 
the lower wharves at Westerly and of the same depth and 40 feet 
wide between the lower and upper wharves at Westerly. 

2. HARBOR AT STONINGTON, CONN. 

The original project adopted by the river and harbor act of May 
23, 1828, provided for the " erection of piers or other works * * * 
for the purpose of making * * * a good and secure harbor." A 
stone pier 740 feet long, with its top 12 feet wide and about 8| feet 
above mean low water, outer slope 1 on 3 and inner slope 3 on 1, was 
built on the east side of the inner harbor (Annual Report for 1879, 
p. 327). An extension to the project to provide for deepening and 
dredging the harbor and its approaches to 12 feet at mean low water 
(S. Doc. No. 23, 42d Cong., 2d sess., and Annual Report for 1872, p. 
917) was adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1873. The 
project was further extended to include the construction of a break- 
water 2,000 feet long at the westerly side of the entrance (Annual 
Report for 1875, p. 243), funds appropriated by the river and harbor 
act of March 3, 1875, and subsequent acts being applied to this 
extension. 

At the time of the adoption of the present project, in 1880, the 
project then existing for the improvement of Stonington Harbor 
comprised, therefore, the erection of piers or other works at the east 
side of the inner harbor, the dredging of the harbor and its ap- 
proaches to a depth of 12 feet at mean low water, and the construc- 
tion of a breakwater 2,000 feet long at the westerly side of the 
entrance. 

3. MYSTIC RIVER, CONN. 

The original project provided for a channel 100 feet in width and 
15 feet in depth at mean low water from Fishers Island Sound to 
the highway bridge at Mystic and the reducing of five bends (An- 
nual Report for 1889, p. 746). Funds for the work were appro- 
priated by the river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, and 
subsequent acts. 

4. NEW LONDON HARBOR, CONN. 

Operations in New London Harbor prior to the adoption of the 
existing project were inaugurated as modifications to the project for 
the improvement of the Thames River. The original work was in 
accordance with a plan printed in the Annual Report of the Chief of 
Engineers for 1878, page 397, which recommended the removal to a 
depth of 16 feet at mean low water, of a shoal lying east of the 
Central Vermont Railroad pier, funds for which were provided by 
the river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, from the appropriation for 
Thames River and thereafter by specific appropriations for the 



1754 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

improvement of New London Harbor. The river and harbor act of 
July 13, 1892, and subsequent acts authorized the expenditure of a 
part of the appropriations for the improvement of Thames River for 
dredging Shaws Cove to a depth of 12 feet at mean low water (II. 
Doc. No. 73, 51st Cong., 2d sess., and Annual Report for 1891, p. 
833). The river and harbor act of June 25, 1910, consolidated the 
improvement of Shaws Cove with that of New London Harbor. 
At the time of the adoption of the present project, in 190-2, and its 
modification, in 1910, the project then existing for the improvement 
of New London Harbor, therefore, formed a part of the project for 
the improvement of the Thames River and comprised the removal, 
to a depth of 16 feet at mean low water, of a shoal lying east of the 
Central Vermont Railroad pier and the dredging to a depth of 12 
feet at mean low water of Shaws Cove. 

5. THAMES RIVER, CONN. 

The original project, adopted by the river and harbor act of July 
4, 1836, provided for "deepening the channel of the River Thames 
leading into Norwich Harbor." The work consisted of the building 
of 11 piers or wing dams, adding to 3 wings already built by private 
enterprise, and the dredging of a channel about 100 feet wide and 
14 feet deep at high water, all in the portion of the river immediately 
below Norwich (Annual Report for 1873, p. 983). 

7. CONNECTICUT RIVER BELOW HARTFORD, CONN. 

The original project adopted by the river and harbor act of July 4, 
1836, provided for the improvement of the harbor of Saybrook by 
removing the bar at the mouth of the Connecticut River (Annual 
Report for 1873, pp. 990 and 996). The improvement was resumed 
by authority of the river and harbor act of March 3, 1871, under a 
plan which provided for a channel 200 feet wide and 8}- feet deep at 
mean low water at Saybrook Bar; thence 100 feet wide and 8 feet 
deep at low water to Hartford; the removal of Chester Rock: and 
pile shore protection at Hartford and Wethersfield (H. Doc. No. 153, 
40th Cong., 2d sess., and Annual Report for 1868, p. 754). It was 
modified by the river and harbor act of June 10, 1872, to provide a 
channel 400 feet wide and 9 feet deep at mean low water across Say- 
brook Bar, to be secured by the construction of jetties and dredging 
(H. Doc. No. 125, 42d Cong., 3d sess., and Annual Report for L873, 
pp. 986 and 997). It was again modified by the river and harbor act 
of March 3, 1881, to provide for revetment and regulating dikes, 
while the depth of the channel was increased to 10 feet (H. Doc. No. 
42, 46th Cong., 2d sess., and Annual Report for 1880, pp. 396 and 
417). It Avas further modified to provide for completing the jetties 
at the mouth of the river at Saybrook to a height of 5 feet at high 
water, with top width of 6 feet, and for deepening the channel at 
Saybrook Bar to 12 feet at mean low water (Annual Report for L888, 
p. 536). And, finally, the project was modified to provide for raising . 
the height of the Hartford dike to 15 feet above low water, if found 
necessary (Annual Report for 1890, p. 614). 



APPENDIX. 1755 

8. HARBOR OF REFUGE, DUCK ISLAND HARBOR, CONN. 

The original project, adopted by the river and harbor act of Sep- 
tember 19, 1890, provided for the construction of three riprap break- 
waters — one extending 3,000 feet westerly from Duck Island, one 
extending 1,750 feet northeasterly from Duck Island, and one extend- 
ing 1,130 feet southwesterly from Menunketesuck Point, each with 
top 10 feet wide and 10 feet above mean low water, with inner slope 
of 1 on 1 and outer slope of 2 on 3 (Annual Report for 1887, p. 641). 
Prior to the adoption of the present project, the breakwater extend- 
ing westerly from Duck Island only had been constructed and for a 
length of but 2,697 feet and with reduced sectional area. 

10. NEW HAVEN HARBOR, CONN. 

The original project, adopted by the river and harbor act of 
August 30, 1852, provided for the removal of Middle Eock at the 
entrance to the harbor. The act of June 10, 1872, extended the scope 
of this feature of the project by providing for the removal of rocks 
in the harbor without especial designation. With the facilities then 
available, the work proved more difficult than was expected, and was 
not continued after 1875, when the harbor breakwaters were proposed. 

The original project for the channel dredged in the harbor, and 
its subsequent extensions up to the time of the adoption of the pres- 
ent project were not defined in terms by the river and harbor acts 
making the appropriations, but followed plans presented in annual 
or special reports to the Chief of Engineers, funds for the execution 
of which were subsequently appropriated. The original plan for 
dredging recommended a channel to the wharves 14 feet deep at 
mean low water and 200 feet wide (H. Ex. Doc. No. 95, 41st Cong., 
3d sess., and Annual Report for 1871, p. 771). Funds for this work 
were appropriated by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1871. 
An extension to the project to provide a channel 16 feet deep and 
200 feet wide through Fort Hale Bar was recommended (H. Ex. 
Doc. No. 137, 42d Cong., 1st sess., and Annual Report for 1872, p. 
860), and funds therefor were appropriated by the river and harbor 
act of June 10, 1872. The next extension was to increase the width 
of the channel above Long Wharf to 400 feet, recommended in a 
report of February 9, 1875, funds for which were appropriated by 
the river and harbor act of March 3, 1875. This was followed by an 
increase in the width of the channel below Long Wharf to 400 feet 
with depth of 16 feet (Annual Report for 1877, p. 212), funds for 
beginning which were appropriated by the river and harbor act of 
June 14, 1878. An increase in depth to 16 feet above Long Wharf 
was recommended (Annual Report for 1879, Part I, p. 336), and the 
first funds for this work were appropriated by the river and harbor 
act of March 3, 1879. The construction of a dike at Sandy Point for 
the improvement of Fort Hale Bar (Annual Report for 1881, p. 
592) was undertaken with funds appropriated by the river and har- 
bor act of August 2, 1882, under plans approved by the Board of 
Engineers October 2, 1882. The Annual Report of the Chief of 
Engineers for 1884, page 645, contains the recommendation that the 
channel be widened to provide greater anchorage space, and under 
the appropriation of July 5, 1884, the extra width, with depths of 



1756 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

12 and 8 feet, were provided in the upper channel, giving widths 
above Long Wharf of from 400 to 700 feet. 

At the time of the adoption of the present project, in 1899, the 
project then existing for the improvement of New Haven Harbor 
comprised, therefore, a channel in general 16 feet deep and from 
400 to 700 feet wide from Long Island Sound to the head of the 
harbor, and a dike to contract the tidal flow at Fort Hale Bar. 

12. MILFORD HARBOR, CONN. 

The original project, adopted by the river and harbor act of June 
23, 1874, provided for the construction of a breakwater and jetties 
and dredging a channel 100 feet wide and 4 feet deep at the mouth 
of the harbor (H. Doc. No. 107, 42d Cong., 3d sess., and Annual 
Report for 1873, p. 1042). The project was extended to include a 
channel, subsequently dredged 60 feet wide and 4 feet deep, to the 
Town Dock, and to include an auxiliary jetty southward from Burns 
Point (Annual Reports for 1878, p. 402, and for 1879, p. 342). funds 
appropriated by the river and harbor act of June 18, 1878, being 
applied to these extensions. The project was again modified to in- 
clude the extension of the channel, 60 feet wide and 4 feet deep, to 
the wharf next above the Town Dock (Annual Report for 1880, p. 
458), funds for which were appropriated by the river and harbor 
act of June 14, 1880. The project was further modified to provide 
a channel 100 feet in width and 8 feet deep at mean low water at the 
entrance to the harbor (Annual Report for 1882, p. 614), funds for 
which were appropriated by the river and harbor act of August 2, 
1882. 

14. BRIDGEPORT HARBOR, CONN. 

Prior to the adoption of the existing project the improvement of 
Bridgeport and Black Rock Harbors was conducted as separate 
projects. The original project for Bridgeport Harbor was adopted 
by the river and harbor act of July 4, 1836, and provided for deepen- 
ing the channel leading into the harbor. A channel 60 feet wide and 
8 feet deep was dredged through the outer bar (Annual Report for 
1871, p. 788). Further operations under the project were conducted 
as outlined in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1871, 
page 789, with funds appropriated by the river and harbor act of 
August 30, 1852. 

A second project was adopted by the river and harbor act of March 
3, 1871, providing for a channel 100 feet wide and 14 feet deep at 
mean low water up to the city wharves, and a jetty or breakwater on 
the east side of the harbor entrance, extending out about 3.000 feet 
from Long Beach (H. Doc. No. 60, 41st Cong., 3d sess., and Annual 
Report for 1871, p. 788) ; modified to provide a channel 100 feet 
wide and 12 feet deep to the city wharves (Annual Report for 1876, 
p. 227), for which funds appropriated by the river and harbor act 
of March 3, 1875, were applied; modified to provide a channel 300 
feet wide and 12 feet deep to the city wharves, and for a channel 
100 feet wide and 9 feet deep from the lower bridge to the hqrse- 
railroad bridge (East Washington Avenue) (Annual Report for 



APPENDIX. 1757 

1878, p. 53), for which funds appropriated by the river and harbor 
act of June 18, 1878, were applied; modified to provide an anchorage 
basin on the west side of the channel inside the inner beacon (Annual 
Report for 1883, p. 520), for which funds appropriated by the river 
and harbor act of August 2, 1882, were applied; modified to extend 
the channel 100 feet wide and 9 feet deep above the horse-railroad 
bridge, for which funds appropriated by the river and harbor act of 
August 11, 1888, were applied, and to construct a breakwater from 
the Tongue to the inner beacon, for which funds were appropriated 
by the river and harbor act of September 19, 1890 (Annual Report 
for 1889, p. 695) ; modified to provide increased width in the an- 
chorage basin inside the inner beacon (Annual Report for 1893, p. 
80), for which funds appropriated by the river and harbor act of 
July 13, 1892, were applied; modified to provide a channel 100 feet 
wide and 15 feet deep at mean low water through the outer bar 
(Annual Report for 1895, p. 793), for which funds appropriated by 
the river and harbor act of August 17, 1894, were applied; and finally 
modified to provide a channel 300 feet wide and 15 feet deep to the 
inner beacon, thence 200 feet wide and 15 feet deep to the lower 
bridge, and a channel 200 feet wide and 12 feet deep up to the cause- 
way at Yellow Mill Pond (H. Doc. No. 61, 54th Cong., 1st sess., and 
Annual Report for 1896, p. 707), for which funds appropriated by 
the river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, were applied. 

The original project for Black Rock Harbor was adopted by the 
river and harbor act of July 4, 1836, and provided for the construc- 
tion of a sea wall to preserve Fayer weather Island (Annual Report 
for 1885, p. 653). A second project was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of July 5, 1884, which provided for a breakwater about 
2,600 feet long, connecting Fayerweather Island and the mainland, 
and for a channel up the east creek, known as Cedar Creek, 80 feet 
wide and 6 feet deep at mean low water (S. Doc. No. 50, 48th Cong., 
1st sess., and Annual Report for 1884, p. 667). 

15. NORWALK HARBOR, CONN. 

The original project adopted by the river and harbor act of June 
10, 1872, provided for a channel 100 feet wide and 6 feet deep at 
mean low water to Norwalk (S. Doc. No. 23, 42d Cong., 2d sess., 
and Annual Report for 1872, p. 901) ; modified to provide a channel 
100 feet wide and 8 feet deep from the outer harbor to South Nor- 
walk, and thence 6 feet deep to Norwalk (Annual Report for 1881, 
p. 609), for which funds appropriated by the river and harbor act 
of June 14, 1880, were applied; extended by the river and harbor 
act of August 18, 1894, to include the removal of a shoal at Ferrys 
Point and the widening of the bend near Keysers Island (Annual 
Report for 1895, p. 805). A second project was adopted by the river 
and harbor act of June 3, 1896, providing for a channel 150 feet wide 
and 10 feet deep at mean low water up to the railroad bridge at 
South Norwalk, and the widening of two bends at the harbor en- 
trance (H. Doc. No. 50, 54th Cong., 1st sess., and Annual Report 
for 1896, p. 813). 



1758 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

16. HARBORS AT FIVEMILE RIVER, STAMFORD, SOUTHPORT, GREEN- 
WICH, AND WESTPORT HARBOR AND SAUGATUCK RIVER, CONN. 

(b) STAMFORD HARBOR, CONN. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
August 5, 1886, and provided for a channel in Mill Creek, now called 
the West Branch, 5 feet deep at mean low water, 80 feet wide, and 
about 6,600 feet long (S. Doc. No. 50, 48th Cong., 1st sess., and 
Annual Report for 1884, p. 672). 

(C) SOUTHPORT HARBOR, CONN. 

The original project, adopted by the river and harbor act of 
March 2, 1829, provided for improving the navigation of the Mill 
River by removing obstructions and constructing such works as will 
prevent the sand from filling up the channel. A breakwater and 
dike were built and a small amount of dredging done (Annual Re- 
port for 1871, p. 824). Funds appropriated by the river and harbor 
act of August 14, 1876, were applied to dredging a channel 60 feet 
wide and 4 feet deep at mean low water from the outer breakwater 
to above the end of the breakwater (Annual Report for 1876. p. 230), 
and funds appropriated by the river and harbor act of March 3, 
1881, were applied to increasing the width of the outer channel to 
100 feet (Annual Report for 1881, p. 607). 

(e) WESTPORT HARBOR AND SAUGATUCK RIVER, CONN. 

The original project was authorized by the river and harbor act 
of March 2, 1827, and provided for removing obstructions to naviga- 
tion and protecting the harbor by a suitable work to prevent the 
washing of the sand from Cedar Point into the harbor. The project 
was modified b}' the river and harbor act of July 4. 1836. to include 
cutting a channel through Great Marsh. The work accomplished is 
outlined in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1871, 
page 801. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE FIRST NEW 
YORK, N. Y., DISTRICT. 



1. PORT CHESTER HARBOR, N. Y. 

Pursuant to the requirements of the river and harbor act of March 
3, 1871, a report upon a survey of this harbor was submitted December 
28, 1871. (S. Dec. No. 23, 42d Cong., 2d sess., and Annual Report 
for 1872, p. 809, without map.) The project recommended in this 
report was adopted by act of June 10, 1872. It provided for the 
removal of Sunken Rock to 11 feet and of Salt Rock to 9 feet at 
mean low water, and the construction of a breakwater at Byram 



appendix. 1759 

Point to be 400 feet long with the top extending 13 feet above mean 
low water. The estimated cost of this work was $96,632. 

In 1884 (Annual Eeport for 1884, p. 712) this project was modi" 
tied so as to provide for a channel 60 to 100 feet wide and 2^ feet 
deep at mean low water up to the vicinity of the bridge at Port 
Chester. Further modification of the project was made in 1888 
(Annual Eeport for 1890, pp. 650 and 651) by omitting the removal 
of Sunken Rock and changing the location of the breakwater so as 
to make it extend from Sunken Rock toward the shore, and also by 
reducing the estimated cost to $52,000. 

By act of March 3, 1899, appropriating $25,000 for this harbor, 
the project of 1872 was enlarged by requiring that this amount be 
"■ expended in enlarging the channel below and up to Town Dock 
to a depth of 12 feet and a width of 70 feet, and from Town Dock to 
the steamboat wharf to a depth of 9 feet and a width of 60 feet." 
The appropriation of this $25,000 increased the estimated cost from 
$52,000 to $77,000. (Annual Report for 1900, pp. 1378, 1422. and 
1423.) The project was further enlarged by act of March 2, 1907, 
by providing for the removal of ledges of rock opposite the southerly 
point of Fox Island, appropriating therefor the sum of $6,500 and 
thereby increasing the estimate to $83,500. 

The amount expended on this project, as modified and enlarged up 
to the time of commencing work on the existing project adopted by 
act of June 25, 1910, was $91,369.12, of which amount $75,000 was 
for new work and $16,369.12 was for maintenance. 

For maps of the locality and additional details concerning this 
harbor prior to the adoption of the existing project see Annual 
Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1885 (contains map), page 
658; 1889 (contains map), page 716; 1895 (no map), page 865; 1897 
(no map), page 1084; and 1900 (no map), pages 1378 and 1423. 

2. MAMARONECK HARBOR, N. Y. 

A report upon a survey of this harbor was submitted January 
18, 1882, pursuant to the requirements of the river and harbor act 
of March 3, 1881 (S. Doc. No. 84, 47th Cong., 3d sess., and Annual 
Report for 1882, p. 637, without maps). The project for improve- 
ment recommended in this report was adopted by act of August 
2, 1882. It provided for the removal of Round Rock to a mean low- 
water depth of 4 feet ; Bush Rock, part of Nells Rock, Inner Steam- 
boat Rock, Outer Steamboat Rock, and Little Nanhook to a depth 
of 7 feet; for dredging a channel 100 feet wide and 7 feet deep at 
mean low water from Long Island Sound to the old steamboat wharf 
on Harbor (Hog) Island, and thence 80 feet wide and 4 feet deep to 
the upper wharves; and in closing a small channel east of Grassy 
Knoll. Estimated cost, $43,000. 

Under date of April 27, 1899, the project was modified by omit- 
ting Nells Rock, Little Nanhook, and Outer Steamboat Rock, and by 
providing for the extension of the channel of 100 feet width and 
7 feet depth to the upper wharves (Annual Report for 1899, p. 
1211). No change was made in the estimate of cost. Under this 
modification Round Rock, Bush Rock, and Inner Steamboat Rock 
were reported removed to the projected depths, and a channel 7 feet 



1760 EEPOET OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

deep and 70 to 100 feet wide was dredged from the harbor entrance 
to the turn at Harbor (Hog) Island, and thence 100 feet wide to 
the upper wharves. The cost of this work was $40,000, of which 
amount $35,371.50 was for new work and $4,628.50 was for main- 
tenance. 

For additional details concerning this harbor prior to the project 
of June 25, 1910, see Annual Reports of the Chief of Engineers for 
the. fiscal years ending June 30, 1886, page 658; 1900, page 1381; 
and 1903, page 859. Sketch maps are contained in the reports for 
1886 and 1903. 

3. LARCHMONT HARBOR, N. Y. 

A report upon a survey of this harbor was submitted November 
26, 1889, pursuant to the requirements of the river and harbor act 
of August 11, 1888 (H. Doc. No. 40, 51st Cong., 1st sess., with map, 
and Annual Report for 1890, p. 65, without map). The project for 
improvement based upon this report was adopted by act of Septem- 
ber 19, 1890. It provided for the building of two breakwaters, one 
to extend from Umbrella Rock to Umbrella Point and the other from 
Huron Rock to Long Beach. Estimated cost, $105,000. Work on 
the project was suspended in 1891, after completing 74 linear feet 
of the Umbrella Breakwater and 64 linear feet of the Huron Break- 
water at a cost of $5,000. No further work was done here until 1900, 
subsequent to the adoption of the present project in 1899. 

For additional details concerning this harbor, see Annual Reports 
of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal years ending June 30, 1891, 
page 800; 1900, page 1383; and 1903, page 860. This latter report 
contains a map of the locality. 

4. ECHO BAY HARBOR, N. Y. 

A report upon a survey of this harbor was submitted December 
20, 1875, in compliance with the provisions of the river and harbor 
act of March 3, 1875 (Annual Report for 1876, p. 263, without map). 
The project recommended in this report was adopted by the act of 
June 18, 1878. It provided for the removal of Start Rock to a depth 
of 7 feet below mean low water and Sheepshead Reef to a depth of 
9 feet. Estimated cost $38,955.38. 

In May, 1889, residents of New Rochelle submitted a petition ask- 
ing for the expenditure of the available funds in dredging. This 
dredging was authorized by the Chief of Engineers (Annual Report 
for 1890, p. 653), and as the result of the expenditure of the balance 
of funds then available, amounting to $3,043.97, a channel 4 feet deep 
at mean low water, 40 feet Avidc, and 1.050 feet long was completed 
October 25, 1889. This channel extended from deep water to about 
300 feet from the head of the harbor. On April 1, 1906, permission 
was granted to the New Rochelle Coal & Lumber Co. to advance its- 
wharf line so as to include this channel within the wharf area and 
to dredge in front of it. This was done, and there is now a channel 
here not less than 6 feet deep at mean low water, connecting with 
the main channel at Hudson Park (Beauford Point). 



APPENDIX. 1761 

By act of March 3, 1899, a further examination of the harbor was 
directed to be made, and in compliance therewith a report was sub- 
mitted December 9, 1899 (H. Doc. No. 235, 56th Cong., 1st sess., with 
map. and Annual Report for 1900, p. 1424, without map), recom- 
mending the completion of the improvement commenced in 1878 and 
suspended in 1883, b}~ completing the removal of Start Rock and 
Sheepshead Eeef to the depth adopted in the project of 1878. Esti- 
mated cost $17,000. When this estimate was submitted a balance of 
the previous estimate (report of Dec. 20, 1875) amounting to $17,000 
had not yet been appropriated. 

In compliance with the requirements of the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1905, a report upon a survev of Long Rock was submitted 
June 27, 1906 (H. Doc. No. 182, 59th Cong., 2d sess., no map). This 
report recommended the removal of Long Rock to a depth of 6 feet 
below mean low water at an estimated cost of $17,871.70. The work 
contemplated under the original project for improvement, and its 
subsequent modification as outlined above, was completed at a cost of 
$47,379.41, of which amount $17,369 was for new work and $10.41 was 
for maintenance. The cost of the improvements made under this proj- 
ect and its modifications was $9,458.08 less than the totals of the 
estimates submitted. There was received from sales $1.25. 

For additional details prior to the adoption of the existing project, 
see Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year end- 
ing June 30, 1900, pages 1423-1429. A sketch map is printed in the 
Annual Report for 1903, page 862. 

5. EAST CHESTER CREEK, N. Y. 

A report upon a survey of this creek was submitted January 19, 
1872 (H. Doc. No. 242, 42d Cong., 2d sess., without map, and 
Annual Report for 1872, p. 812, without map) pursuant to the re- 
quirements of the river and harbor act of March 3, 1871. The proj- 
ect for improvement recommended in this report provided for a 
channel 9 feet deep at mean high water and 100 feet wide up to a 
point about 3,000 feet above Lockwoods at Boston Post Road; the 
excavating of a basin at the upper end of the channel; and the dik- 
ing and revetting of the banks of the dredged cuts, at an estimated 
cost of $136,505 (Annual Report for 1890, pp. 657-659). It was 
adopted by the act of March 3, 1873, which appropriated $25,000 
for commencing work thereunder. Pending the transfer of land to 
the United States by the State of New York, active operations were 
delayed until April 16, 1877. Subsequent to the date of adopting 
the project in 1873 and up to 1891, several modifications of the plan 
of improvement and of estimated cost thereof Avere considered (An- 
nual Report for 1891, pp. 806-811). In 1891 the estimated cost for 
completing the improvement was finally fixed at $124,000; in this 
estimate part of the dike construction and the excavation of the 
basin were omitted (Annual Report for 1891, p 809). 

The project was completed in 1899, at a cost of $89,091.22. Up to 
the time of commencing work under the existing project in 1910, 
the total expenditures amounted to $115,502, of which amount $89,- 
091.22, being $34,908.78 less than the estimate, was for new work, 
and $26,410.78 was for maintenance. 
8373°— eng 1915 111 



1762 EEPOET OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

For additional details prior to the adoption of the existing project, 
see Annual Reports of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal years 
ending June 30, 1897, page 1089, and 1901, page 1061. A sketch' map 
is printed in the report for 1901, page 1017. 

7. BRONX RIVER, N. Y. 

The original project (Annual Report for 1896, p. 733) for the 
improvement of this stream was adopted by the river and harbor act 
of June 3, 1896. It provided for making a channel 4 feet deep at 
mean low water and 100 feet wide from the mouth to Barlow Street 
(now Falconer Street) ; thence to Dongan Street (now Garrison Ave- 
nue), 60 feet wide; and thence to the head of navigation, 50 feet 
wide, the work to be done by dredging and rock removal at an cli- 
mated cost of $85,985. 

For additional details prior to the adoption of the existing project, 
see Annual Reports of the Chief of Engineers for fiscal years ending 
June 30, 1881, page 665; 1891, page 919; 1900, page 1389; and 1912, 
page 1469. A sketch map of the locality is printed in the report 
for 1912, page 1470. 

8. EAST RIVER AND HELL GATE, N. Y. 

Work on the improvement of the East River was commenced on 
August 20, 1851, with funds furnished by citizens of the city of 
New York. This work was continued until February 28, 1852, by 
which date the removal of two rocks in Hell Gate had been com- 
pleted while four others had been partially removed. A part of 
Diamond Reef was also removed. The total expenditure for this 
work was $13,861.59. 

On August 30, 1852, Congress appropriated $20,000 " for the fur- 
ther improvement of the harbor of New York by removing the rocks 
at Hell Gate and Diamond Reef, in the East River." This sum was 
expended in removing Pot Rock in Hell Gate to 20.5 feet below mean 
low water. 

9. HARLEM RIVER, N. Y. 

A report upon a survey of this river (H. Doc. No. 174, 43d Cong., 
1st sess., without map, and Annual Report for 1874, pt. 2, p. 169) 
was submitted February 19, 1874, in compliance with the require- 
ments of the river and harbor act of March 3, 1873. A project based 
upon the recommendations made on this report was adopted by river 
and harbor act of June 23, 1874. It provided for the removal of four 
piers of an old bridge between East One hundred and fourteenth 
Street and Wards Island, the removal of Candle Factory Reef at the 
foot of East One hundred and twenty-second Street, ami the removal 
of small reefs off East One hundred and twenty-fifth Street ami at 
the mouth of Mott Haven Canal to a depth of 12 feet at mean low 
water, at an estimated cost of $167,875.56. 

Operations under this project were commenced during the fiscal 
year ending June 30, 1875, and up to October 7. 1875, when work was 
suspended, three bridge piers off the foot of East One hundred and 
fourteenth Street had been removed, and a mean low-water depth of 
14£ feet had been secured over a reef off East One hundred and 



APPENDIX. 1763 

twenty-fifth Street (Annual Report for 1876, p. 244). There was 
expended on this work $21,000. 

12. BURLINGTON HARBOR, VT. 

The original project adopted July 4. 1836, provided for the forma- 
tion of an artificial harbor in front of the city of Burlington by con- 
structing a breakwater parallel with the shore and about 1,000 feet 
distant from the docks and wharves. "Work was commenced in 1836 
and continued at intervals as funds became available until 1857, 
when 1,069 feet of breakwater had been completed. In 1867 the 
project was extended so as to provide for the construction of an 
additional 1,500 feet of breakwater to the north and west of the 
existing structure. As it was reported at the time that an extension 
to the south was inadvisable and that an extension to the north on the 
original alignment would seriously contract the area of the harbor. 
the separate location of the new breakwater was decided upon. 
However, as constructed, this extension was continued from the 
north end of the old portion. 

Up to 1874 there were completed 831 feet of the northerly exten- 
sion, but the wharves in the meanwhile having been constructed to 
the southward along the shore line a diversion of available funds 
for a southerly extension in order to protect the new wharves was 
authorized, and such an extension, 617 linear feet in length, was 
built. In June of the same year a plan was adopted for a further 
extension northward of the breakwater for a distance of 2,000 feet, 
the cost being estimated at $340,000. (Annual Report for 1874, p. 
275.) 

In 1884 another southerly extension of the breakwater was ap- 
proved, and prior to 1886, when the present project was adopted, a 
breakwater of a total length of 3,551 feet had been constructed and 
maintained. 

Prior to 1886 the breakwater as built consisted of vertical wooden 
cribs of a width of about 35 feet extending from the lake bottom to 
an elevation of about 8 feet above low lake level filled with rubble 
stone and sheathed with plank on the exposed face. 

13. NARROWS OF LAKE CHAMPLAIN, N. Y. AND VT. 

The original project (based on H. Doc. No. 138, 48th Cong., 2d 
sess.), adopted by the act of August 5, 1886, had for its object the 
removal of such obstructions in the channel of the Narrows as 
would afford a least depth of 12 feet and a least width of 150 feet 
from Whitehall to the Elbow, and 12 feet depth and 200 feet width 
along Cedar Mountain and across Kenyon Bay, at an estimated cost 
of $80,000. Under appropriations in 1886 and 1888, aggregating 
$45,000, the project was completed at a little more than half the 
estimated cost, which was due to the dredging having been accom- 
plished at 17 cents and 10.8 cents per cubic yard, instead of 25 and 
30 cents, as estimated. The resulting channel, however, being found 
deficient in width at certain sharp bends, a supplementary project 
was adopted in 1890 involving dredging in widening the channel at 
these localities, at an estimated cost of $21,000. The original project 



1764 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

as thus extended in 1890 was completed in 1896 at a cost of $63,500 
and a channel of project depth was created thereby. 

14. HUDSON RIVER, N. Y. 

From 1797 to 1834 the improvement of the Hudson River waa 
carried on solely by the State of New York, and from 1834 to L892 
by the State in conjunction with the Federal Government. Tt con- 
sisted in the construction of jetties and in dredging, which resulted, 
however, in no permanent improvement of the river. In its natural 
condition the channel from Waterford to Hudson was narrow and 
crooked, with banks 650 to 3,000 feet apart and a navigable depth at 
mean low water of 3^ to 4 feet between Albany and Waterford, ~i\ 
feet between Albany and New 7 Baltimore, 11 feet between New Bal- 
timore and Coxsackie, and not less than 12 feet between Coxsackie 
and Hudson. Below Hudson a natural depth existed of about 25 
feet, barring a few shoals. Above Hudson the river in its navigable 
state was at many places divided by shoals and islands into two or 
more channels and was navigable for shallow-draft vessels only. 
Its commercial importance, however, w r as great, as it afforded the 
chief traffic outlet for the cities of Albany and Troy and connected 
the Champlain and Erie Canals, opened in 1825. with the Atlantic 
Ocean. The former canal entered the Hudson River in the pooJ 
formed by the dam at Troy, which was completed by the State of 
New York in 1823. Railroads, though being built, were negligible 
as competing carriers. Other connections between the Hudson and 
the main Erie and Champlain Canals were by canals opening into 
the Hudson at Watervliet opposite Troy and at Albany. 

A board of engineers was convened in 1834 to examine into projects 
for further improvement and to devise a plan with estimates of cost 
for the improvement of the river. As a result the original project 
for the improvement (H. Doc. No. 189. W. D., 22d Cong.. 1st sess.) 
was adopted that year. The estimated cost was $819,634.10. This 
project was modified in 1852 and in 1866 and, as modified, had for its 
object the securing of a navigable channel of sufficient width and 
9 feet depth at mean low water between Troy and Albany and 11 feet 
between Albany and New Baltimore, to be obtained by dredg- 
ing and protected by the construction of longitudinal dikes and 
occasional intersecting cross dams, thus forming tidal basins. In 
carrying on this work $1,667,938 was expended by the United States. 

A second project (H. Doc. No. 23, 52d Cong., 1st sess.) was adopted 
July 13, 1892. on recommendation of the Board of Engineers con- 
vened in compliance with the act of September 19, 1890. This project 
was modified March 2, 1899. and as modified it provided for main- 
tenance and the construction of new dikes for regulating the channel 
between Coxsackie and New Baltimore and for deepenmg the river 
so as to afford a channel 12 feet deep at mean low water from Cox- 
sackie to the State dam at Troy: the widths of channel to be 400 feel 
from Coxsackie to Broadway. Troy, thence decreasing to 150 feet at 
Jacob Street, thence remaining 150 feet to the State dam. Though 
not so reported, this project was practically completed in 1910. and 
work under it was abandoned: the balance of funds on hand was 
applied to work under the existing project. For history of the im- 
provement of this river see Annual Report for 1885 (p. '677 et seq.) ; 



APPENDIX. 



1765 



for report of the board which formulated the second project see 
Annual Report for 1892 (p. 750 et seq.). 

The sum of $5,466,752.32 was expended by the United States in the 
work under the original and second projects, including the author- 
ized expenditure of $3S,432.37 at Stonehouse Bar, Tarrytown Har- 
bor, and Schodack Creek, not considered in the original estimates. 

The improvement under the projects of 1834 and 1892 resulted in 
securing by 1910 a channel from the State dam at Troy to Coxsackie 
of the maximum available depths at mean low water 1 and minimum 
available widths, as shown by the following table : 



Locality. 


Width. 


Depth. 


Locality. 


Width. 


Depth. 




Feet. 
GOO 
50 
200 
400 
400 
50 

100 
200 
200 
200 
60 
270 
320 
500 
200 
200 
300 

100 
100 
100 

90 
90 
75 


Feet. 
12.0 
12.0 
11.5 
12.0 
12.0 
12.0 

10.5 
12.0 
11.5 
11.5 
11.5 
12.0 
11.5 
12.0 
12.0 
11.5 
12.0 

10.0 
12.0 
12.0 

12.0 
11.5 
11.5 




Feet. 
300 
200 
170 
230 
130 
100 
220 
90 
170 
200 

300 

80 
150 
200 

100 

45 
50 
100 
100 

75 


Feet. 
11.5 




Path Shoal 

Kellogg Shoal 


12.0 




12.0 












11.0 




Covills Folly 


12.0 












12.0 






12.0 


Nine Mile Tree Crossover 


Front of Watervliet Arsenal.. 
Arsenal to Congress Street, 
Troy, N. Y.... 


12.0 




12.0 




Congress Street Bridge- 






12.0 






12.0 


Bogart Light Shoal 

Douws Point Crossover 


Congress Street to Broadway.. 
Broadway to Delaware & 


12.0 
12.0 


Passenger bridge: 


Delaware & Hudson bridge: 


11.0 






12.0 






11.0 


Freight bridge: 


IToosick Street to Boutwells.. 
Boutwells to Middleburgh 


12.0 




8.5 













15. SAUGERTIES HARBOR, N. Y. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
July 5, 1884, and modified in 1887. As modified, it provided for the 
securing of a permanent channel 7 feet deep at mean low water 
and 100 feet wide from the creek to deep water in the Hudson River, 
a distance of about three-quarters of a mile, by the construction of 
two parallel dikes, each 2,300 feet long, 260 feet apart on the inside 
and 280 feet apart on the outside, and by dredging, if found neces- 
sary, 30,000 cubic yards of material at an estimated cost of $52,000. 
It was completed in 1892 at an expenditure of $42,000. As com- 
pleted it resulted in the construction of two parallel dikes of 2,058 
feet and 2,363 feet, respectively, with a waterway between them 260 
feet wide, and the navigable channel deepened by dredging for a 
width of 150 feet. 



19. HUDSON RIVER CHANNEL, NEW YORK HARBOR. 

The first project for improvement of the Hudson River within the 
section included in the present project was adopted March 3, 1875, 
and is based upon a report, with estimate of cost, submitted February 

1 This plane of mean low water is 3.1 feet higher at Troy, and 2.5 teef at Albany and 
south from Albany, than the plane of lowest water assumed for project of 1910. 



1766 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

1, 187.5 (H. Doc. No. 158, 43d Cong., 2d sens., without map, and 
Annual Report for 1875, p. 216, without map). It provided for 
dredging a shoal to a depth of 25 feet at mean low water from the 
neighborhood of Pavonia Ferry to a short distance below the Cunard 
docks, over an area of 223,500 square yards. Estimated cost, 
$101,807.20. 

In 1876 there was removed from this shoal 163,G39 cubic .yards of 
material, and in 1877 (Annual Report for 1877, p. 215) an examina- 
tion and survey showed that about 100,000 cubic yards of material 
had been washed into the dredged area, leaving nearly the same 
depth of water as existed before the dredging was done. Under 
date of April 5, 1877 (Annual Report for 1877, p. 246), it was 
recommended that no further work be done under this project. The 
amount expended w T as $25,000. 

There being no funds available and no project for the improve- 
ment of the Hudson (North) River, in the section situated between 
the city of New York and Jersey City, N. J., the sum of $25,000 
was authorized by joint resolution of July 1, 1902, to be diverted 
from the appropriations theretofore made for the improvement of 
Ambrose Channel, New York Harbor, for the removal of a rock or 
obstruction near Pier A, North River. The river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1905, authorized an additional sum, not to exceed $20,000, 
to be diverted for the same purpose. The rock was reported removed 
to a depth of 40 feet at mean low water in December. L909 (Annual 
Report 1910, p. 1210). The cost of this work was $41,479.12. Sub- 
sequent examination showed that an extension of this rock had but 
38 feet of water over it at mean low water. The removal of this 
part of the rock to a depth of 40 feet is provided for in the existing 
project. 

Further details are published in the Annual Report of the Chief 
of Engineers for 1882 (no map), page 719, part 1; 1884 (no map), 
page 774; and 1885 (contains map), page 791. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OP PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE SECOND NEW- 
YORK, N. Y., DISTRICT. 



1. NEW YORK HARBOR, N. Y. 

The first appropriation for New York Harbor was one of $200,000 
made by the river and harbor act of July 5. 1884, for "deepening 
Gedneys Channel through Sandy Hook Bar."' It was not made in 
reference to any recommendation of the Engineer Department, nor 
upon any estimate of cost, and it provided no specific depth or width. 
It was regarded as an experiment, to ascertain whether the channel 
could be deepened without contraction by breakwaters. It was more 
successful than had been anticipated and by the river and harbor act 
of August 5, 1880, Congress appropriated" S750.000 "to secure a 30- 
foot channel at mean low water at the Sandy Hook entrance of the 
harbor, upon such plan as the Secretary of War may approve." The 
Secretary of War approved, on December 27, 1886, a plan for " secur- 



APPENDIX. 1767 

ing a permanent low-water channel 30 feet deep from the deep water 
of Xew York Harbor to the deep water of the Atlantic bv way of 
Sandy Hook," estimated to cost $1 ,490,000. (Annual Report *f or 1887, 
pt. 1, p. 62.) In the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for the 
fiscal year ending June 30, 1888. part 1, page 63, the width of chan- 
nel so approved is stated as 1,000 feet. 

These are the first published reports describing the limits of the 
project, which was completed under subsequent appropriations in 
October, 1891. This channel was maintained to its full depth and, 
as nearly as possible, to its full width, with increased width at the 
bend. Since Ambrose Channel was opened to navigation by vessels 
under their own motive power, the old channel has decreased in im- 
portance, and is now maintained to its full depth, but not necessarily 
to full width, for use by sailing vessels and tows which are excluded 
from Ambrose Channel. 

A joint resolution of Congress approved January 12, 1899 (public 
resolution No. 7), directed the Secretary of War — 

to submit a report of survey and estimate for the improvement of the east 
channel in New York Harbor from the Narrows to the sea and for the enlarg- 
ing of the same to the depth of 35 feet and a width of 1,500 feet, and also to 
report upon the desirability of such improvement. 

This report was submitted and printed as House Document No. 
159, Fifty-fifth Congress, third session, and contained estimates by 
the Board of Engineers already prepared for a channel 2,000 feet 
wide and 35 feet deep, and expressing the opinion that the channel 
should ultimately be made 40 feet deep, at estimated cost of $6,688,000. 
This report was accepted by Conugress as sufficiently meeting the re- 
quirement, and on March 3, 1899, an appropriation was made for im- 
proving New York Harbor — 

by a deep channel 2,000 feet wide and 40 feet deep from the Narrows by the 
so-called East Channel, across Sandy Hook Bar to the open sea, in accordance 
with the recommendation contained in House Document No. 159, Fifty-fifth 
Congress, third session, $1,000,000: Provided, That the Secretary of War may 
forthwith enter into a contract or contracts for such materials and work as may 
be necessary for the completion of said project, to be paid for as appropriations 
may from time to time be made by law, not to exceed in the aggregate 
$3,000,000, exclusive of the amount herein and heretofore appropriated. 

If, however, the Secretary of War shall be unable to make a contract or con- 
tracts for the completion of said project for a sum within the amounts above 
specified, then the said $1,000,000 herein appropriated, or so much thereof as 
may be necessary, shall be applied by him in the construction or purchase of 
such dredges, steamboats and other plant, machinery, and appliances as may be 
necessary to prosecute said project, and shall cause the work on said project 
to be entered upon and prosecuted under the charge of the Secretary of War 
by employment of labor and materials necessary therefor, to be paid for as 
appropriations may from time to time be made by law, not to exceed in the 
aggregate the said sum of $3,000,000, exclusive of the $1,000,000 herein 
appropriated. 

This limit of authorized expenditures, $4,000,000, was increased to 
$5,148,510, by act of Congress of March 2, 1907. Joint resolution of 
Congress July 1, 1902, and the river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, 
authorized the diversion of $45,000 from appropriation for Ambrose 
Channel, to be applied to the removal of a submerged reef in the 
North River, near Pier A. The reef was removed to 40 feet depth 
in December, 1909, at net cost of $41,479.12, and the balance of the 
$45,000 reverted to Ambrose Channel funds. 



1768 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 
2. NEW YORK HARBOR; CONEY ISLAND CHANNEL. 

The first work done in this channel was August to November, 1900. 
Dredging was done near the west end of the channel to remove part 
of a shoal called the "Lewis," it being traditional that a tug of that 
name sunk in the vicinity many years ago and caused the formation 
of the shoal. This work was done from funds appropriated for 
maintenance of entrance channels in New York Harbor, under au- 
thority of the Chief of Engineers dated July 31, 1900. Under agree- 
ment with the R. G. Packard Co., 38,460 cubic yards of sand were 
excavated, at 24 cents a cubic yard, and the channel was straightened 
and made 14 feet deep for widths of 500 to 550 feet. (Annual Report 
for 1900, pt. 1, p. 1287.) Under an allotment of $8,000 from the ap- 
propriation of April 28, 1904, for emergencies of rivers and harbors, 
21,649 cubic yards of sand were dredged from the west end of this 
channel to restore the 14-foot depth for a width of 400 feet. The 
work was done June- August, 1905, under contract with the W. H. 
Beard Dredging Co., at a price of 36 cents per cubic yard. (Annual 
Report for 1900, pt. 1, p. 970.) The total expenditures on account of 
the above work amounted to $17,230.40. 

3. NEW YORK HARBOR; BAY RIDGE AND RED HOOK CHANNELS. 

The first project for improving Bay Ridge and Red Hook Chan- 
nels was adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1881, and 
was based upon a report and survev ordered by act of Congress of June 
14, 1880. (Annual Report for 1881, p. 635.) The project provided 
for dredging a channel 18 feet deep at mean low water and 200 feet 
wide, from Hamilton Avenue Bridge to the 18-foot contour in the 
bay, the upper 400 feet of its length narrowing to 100 feet in width; 
length, 9,000 feet; estimated cost, $182,850. The project was revised 
(Annual Report for 1885, pp. 93 and 672) to provide for a fork near 
the outer end, one branch extending northwardly to Erie Basin en- 
trance, the other southwestwardlv to the 18-foot contour opposite 
Forty-eighth Street, at total estimated cost of $192,564.90. 

In 1887 this channel, then about half completed, was already re- 
garded as insufficient, and an estimate of $600,000 was submitted for 
a channel 21 feet deep and 400 feet wide (Annual Report for 1888, 
p. 613). The river and harbor act of August 11, 1888, modified the 
project of 1881, and provided for deepening Red Hook Channel to 
21 feet and widening it to 400 feet from Percival Street to the 23-foot 
curve opposite Erie Basin entrance. This increased depth was ex- 
tended to include Bay Ridge Channel, under the specific terms of the 
river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, which appropriated 
$100,000 for a channel 400 feet wide and 21 feet deep on the south 
shore, from Twenty-eighth Street south along that shore to the 21- 
foot curve near Bay Ridge. This project was completed in July. 
1895, at an expenditure of $410,100. 

A second project was adopted by the specific terms of the river 
and harbor act of August 18, 1894, providing in detail for continuing 
the improvement of Bay Ridge Channel from its junction with 
Gowanus Creek Channel near Twenty-eighth Street to the 26-foot 
contour, making it 800 feet wide and 26 feet deep, and continuing 
the improvement of Red Hook Channel from its junction with Bay 
Ridge Channel to its connection with Buttermilk Channel, making 



APPENDIX. 1769 

it 400 feet wide and 26 feet deep. This project was based upon sur- 
veys of the two localities ordered by act of Congress of September 
19, 1890 (H. Ex. Docs. Nos. 26 and 60, 51st Cong., 2d sess.). The 
estimated cost was $633,300. The project also included an expendi- 
ture of $20,000 for 21 feet depth and 250 feet width in Gowanus 
Creek, which was not so applied because the channel was already 21 
feet deep. Up to June 30, 1896, $561,939.14 had been expended upon 
this project. By the terms of the river and harbor act of June 3, 
1896, this project was modified to add Buttermilk Channel to the 
project and to include a certain triangular area at the bend where 
Eed Hook Channel joins Bay Eidge Channel; all to be made 26 feet 
deep and with " width as recommended for each." This provided for 
a width of 800 feet in Bay Eidge Channel, 400 feet in Eed Hook 
Channel, a maximum width of 900 feet in triangular area, and 1,000 
feet width in Buttermilk Channel. The act also provided for ex- 
penditure of $5,000 in dredging Gowanus Canal from Percival Street 
to Hamilton Avenue Bridge, dimensions not specified, and authorized 
a continuing contract at not to exceed the sum of $637,000 in addi- 
tion to $200,000 cash appropriation. This project was completed 
June 24, 1899. Gowanus Canal was dredged from Percival Street 
to 50 feet below the Hamilton Avenue Bridge, making it 18 feet deep 
with width of 155 feet at Percival Street, narrowing to 55 feet at the 
upper end. The other channels were made the full dimensions named 
in the project. The total amount expended on the second project was 
$667,920.05. 

6. NEWTOWN CREEK, N. Y. 

In 1857 the depth at mean low water in Newtown Creek, near its 
mouth, was about 17 feet, but in 1879, prior to the adoption of the 
original project for improvement, it had shoaled to about 12.5 feet. 
This shoaling, and for a number of years subsequent to the time that 
the improvement of this waterway was undertaken by the United 
States, was very largely due to the subsidence of the meadow lands 
which bordered the creek for considerable areas toward the head of 
navigation. 

The original project for improvement, which was adopted by the 
river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, and was modified in 1884, pro- 
vided for dredging of a channel 18 to 21 feet deep at mean low 
water, and 200 feet wide, extending from East Eiver to the Vernon 
Avenue Bridge at an estimated cost of $36,250. In 1881 a channel 
18 feet deep at mean low water and 60 feet wide was dredged for the 
project length and it was recommended that the estimated cost be 
increased to $46,000. In 1883 the channel width was increased by 
dredging to 150 feet for 1,200 feet and to 75 feet for an additional 
1,100 feet. The river and harbor act of July 5, 1884, provided for 
continuing the improvement to provide the following dimensions : 



Section. 


Depth 
(at mean 

low 
water). 


Width. 




Feet. 
18 
15 
12 
10 


Feet. 

175 




150 to 125 




150 to 125 




100 to 125 







1770 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

The estimated cost was $230,569. In 1889 a revised estimate of 
cost of $170,58(5.30 was submitted. (See Annual Report for 1889, 
p. 778.) In 1801 a channel 10 feet deep at mean low water and 100 
feet wide was dredged for a distance of 700 feet eastwardly from the 
Nichols Chemical Works in the English Kills branch (now Maspeth 
Creek). In 1891 an examination was made with a view to extending 
the improvement in the east branch from the Metropolis" Avenue 
Bridge to Montrose Avenue, but was reported adverselv. (H. Ex. 
Doc. No. 32, 53d Cong., 3d sess.) In 1895 about 150 tons' of boulders 
were removed from the mouth of the creek by the United States drill 
scow Hudson. The condition of the improvement on June 30, 1896, 
was reported as follows. (See Annual Report for 1896, p. 761.) 

The channel has been dredged to depths and widths as follows: 



Depth. 



Entrance to Vernon Avenue Bridge 

Thence to Central Oil W r orks 

Thence to Queens County Oil Works 

Thence to Nichols Chemical Works'. 

Thence to Maspeth Avenue 

Thence to Metropolitan Avenue: 

East branch 

West branch 

English Kills (now called Maspeth Creek), channel 7uo feet long 



Feet. 


Feet. 




18 


40 


21 


80 


16 


40 


18 


100 


14 


10 


10 


50 


10 


100 


10 


50 


10 


100 


8 



Under the previous and modified projects a total of about 694.393 
cubic yards of material was removed and $197,500 was expended. 
These amounts included both original work and maintenance, no 
separate accounts having been kept. 

7. JAMAICA BAY, N. Y. 

The only previous project for improving Jamaica Bay contem- 
plated an improvement of only that part of the bay leading to the 
Canarsie landings, and v r as carried on under title of '"Improving 
Canarsie Bay, N. Y." It was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
1880, and contemplated dredging a channel 100 to 150 feet wide and 
6 feet deep to connect the Canarsie landings with Big Channel, 
Jamaica Bay, and building dikes on either side of the dredged chan- 
nel. The project was enlarged in 1889 and again in 1896 to provide 
for its extension along the Canarsie water front 1.800 feet southwest- 
wardly to Island Channel, with 50 feet width and 1 feet depth, and 
1.200 rtortheastwardlv to Gophel Channel, 50 feet wide and .'> feet 
depth. The estimate*d cost was $88,000. Up to June 30, L912, $69,- 
872.36 had been expended upon original work and $2,961.45 upon 
maintenance, a total of $72,833.81. The channels had been dredged 
to the required depth and nearly to the required width and the two 
dikes had been built. The channels shoaled so rapidly that it was 
impracticable to maintain them continuously at any moderate cost; 
the dikes had deteriorated. In 1912. when work was begun upon the 
general project for improving Jamaica Bay. which included the 
approaches to Canarsie. the improvement of Canarsie Bay as a sepa- 
rate work was abandoned. 



APPENDIX. 1771 

8. SHEEPSHEAD BAY, N. Y. 

The initial project for the improvement of Sheepshead Bay was 
adopted bv the river and harbor act of June 14. 1880, at an esti- 
mated cost of $100,000 (H. Ex. Doc. No. 89, 45th Cong., 3d sess.). 
The project contemplated the construction of creosoted-timber dikes 
to confine and direct the flow of water in such a way as to create 
reservoirs and cause a scour sufficient to maintain a channel 6 feet 
deep at mean low water. On account of the shifting of sand at the 
entrance and the westward progression of Rockaway Point, it was 
believed to be advisable to delay the prosecution of the improvement. 
In 1882 the plan was changed to provide for dredging a channel 100 
feet wide and 6 feet deep at mean low water connecting Sheepshead 
Bay and Dead Horse Inlet and for an interior channel from the vil- 
lage of Sheepshead Bay eastward to connect with the Dead Horse 
Inlet connection, at an estimated cost of $34,200. 

In 1883, 1885, and 1886 dredging operations were carried on and 
a channel 1,600 feet long, about 100 feet wide and 4 feet deep at mean 
low water, connecting Sheepshead Bay and Dead Horse Inlet was 
obtained. In 1889 an interior channel 60 feet wide and 5.5 feet deep 
at mean low water was dredged from the village of Sheepshead Bay 
eastward for a distance of 3,400 feet. Under the original project 
a total of 68.281 cubic yards was removed and $26,000 was expended. 
In 1898 a storm broke through the eastern end of Coney Island, Man- 
hattan Beach, at a point about opposite the mouth of Hog Creek. 
Under these same storm conditions the sand was shifted northeast 
and the channel in that section closed and partially obliterated. The 
present inlet to Sheepshead Bay was the result. 

9. HARBORS AT PORT JEFFERSON. MATTITUCK, HUNTINGTON, AND 
FLUSHING BAY, N. Y. 

(A) PORT JEFFERSON, N. Y. 

The first appropriation for Port Jefferson Harbor was $15,000, 
made by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1871 (H. Ex. Doc. No. 
60, 41st Cong., 3d sess.). The improvement contemplated was the 
construction of an east breakwater, about 800 feet in length, to arrest 
the westward movement of the sand and gravel, which formed the 
spit on the east side of the entrance to the harbor with the idea that 
the tidal flow would be strengthened and that its velocity and force 
would be sufficient to scour a channel and to maintain it to the 
projected depth of 7 feet at mean low water. The estimated cost was 
$175,000. In 1875 the plan was modified in accordance with the 
report of the district officer to include a west jetty to assist in direct- 
ing the tidal flow. The west jetty was started in 1876. In 1877 the 
district officer recommended the extension of the east breakwater to 
the 9-foot curve and that the dimensions of the channel be increased 
to 8 feet in depth at mean low water and 200 feet in width, at an esti- 
mated cost of $34,000. 

The construction of the east jetty was commenced in May, 1872, 
and in June, 1873, it had been built to a length of 1,052 feet. The 
effect was marked, but the assistance of a west jetty and dredging 
through the bar were considered advisable. In 1883 the east jetty 



1772 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

had been extended to a length of 1,390 feet with a depth of 10 feet at 
low water at its outer end, and the west jetty had been extended to 
a length of 940 feet with 6.5 feet of water at its outer end. Up to 
this time 26,131 tons of stone had been placed in the two structures. 
Old reports are not specific, but it is estimated that 16,000 tons were 
placed in the east and 10,131 in the west jetty. 

Under these projects comparatively little dredging was done, a 
total of 8,165 cubic yards having been removed, but the scour main- 
tained a channel approximately 100 feet wide and 8 feet deep at 
mean low water. The total amount appropriated for this project was 
$79,000. 

(c) HUNTINGTON HARBOR, N. Y. 

Prior to the improvement of Huntington Harbor by the United 
States a broad expanse of mud flats existed in front of the wharves 
near the head of navigation and extended northwardly for about 
3,000 feet, but from this point to the inlet, a distance of about 7,600 
feet, a channel 8 feet deep at mean low water existed. The entrance 
was obstructed by a few bowlders and a bar with a depth of about 3 
feet at mean low water. Such commerce as existed was carried on at 
high water. The improvement contemplated the removal of the bar 
at the entrance and provision for a dredged channel 8 feet deep at 
mean low water with a width of 150 feet, extending from the 8-foot 
contour in Huntington Harbor, near Ketcham's Dock, to the old 
Town Dock, a distance of about 2,200 feet. The head of navigation 
was at the causeway, about one-third of a mile south of the old 
Town Dock. 

The initial project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
June 10, 1872, at an estimated cost of $22,500 (S. Ex. Doc. No. 23, 
42d Cong., 2d sess.). The first work of improvement was begun in 
1872 and the work completed in 1873. The entrance channel was 
dredged to a depth of 8 feet at mean low water for a width of 130 
feet, and a channel 8 feet deep at mean low water and 150 feet wide 
for a distance of 1,300 feet and 130 feet wide for an additional 900 
feet was dredged through the mud flats to the old Town Dock. A 
total of 91,786 cubic yards of material was removed and $22.:_". |, . , . 16 
was expended on the project. 

(d) FLUSHING BAY, N. Y. 

. Prior to the improvement of Flushing Bay by the United States a 
channel about 9 feet deep at mean low water with widths varying 
from 100 to 600 feet extended for a distance of about 2,000 feet from 
deep water in East River. Throughout the remainder of the bay 
up to the mouth of Flushing Creek a more or less uniform depth of 
from 4 to 5 feet at mean low water existed. The depths at mean low 
water in Flushing Creek varied from to 21 feet and the widths 
varied from 40 to 300 feet. The insufficient depths over the larger 
portion of the bay greatly restricted navigation. 

The initial project contemplated the construction of a dike system 
on the west side of the channel so as to form a tidal basin, the outlet 
of which would be through the projected channel, which was to lie 
dredged to a depth of 6 feet at mean low water. The flow of water 



APPENDIX. 1773 

from the tidal basin was to be further guided by a dike to be con- 
structed on the east side of Flushing Bay. It was expected that the 
force of the tidal flow, with the assistance of a moderate amount of 
dredging, would be sufficient to scour out and maintain a channel 6 
feet deep at mean low water. The initial project was adopted by 
the river and harbor act of March 3, 1879, at an estimated cost of 
SI 73.500 and provided for the dredging of 83,000 cubic yards (more 
or less) of material and the construction of 16,700 linear feet of dike. 
The construction of the dike was begun in February, 1880, and 
3,057 linear feet were built along the west side of the channel, begin- 
ning at a point about 900 feet from the head of the bay. By June 
24, 1SS1, a channel 6,000 feet long, 65 feet wide, and 6 "feet deep at 
mean low water had been dredged. In 1883 a spur channel 1,500 feet 
long, 80 feet wide, and 6 feet deep at mean low water was dredged 
from a point on the main channel near the south end of the dike 
westwardly to Hill's Dock. Dredging operations were continued and 
the channel was increased in width from time to time, but consider- 
able local opposition to the construction of the cross dike to form 
the tidal basin and the training dike on the east side developed, and 
in 1888 the project was modified so that the construction of these 
two sections was omitted and the extension of the dike already con- 
structed was provided for. (See Annual Report for 1889, p. 730.) 
The existing dike was extended to a length of 4,663 feet in 1889, but 
such vigorous protest was entered against any further dike construc- 
tion that the project was again modified in 1891, discontinuing that 
feature of the improvement. (See Annual Report for 1892, p. 723.) 
In 1907 the project was modified for the third time and the dredg- 
ing of a channel 6 feet deep at mean low water, 200 feet wide, extend- 
ing from the 6-foot contour in the bay to the Broadway Bridge, 
thence 100 feet wide to the Main Street Bridge of the Long Island 
Railroad, was provided for. By the close of the fiscal year 1909 the 
project had been completed except for the removal of a small shoal 
just north of the Broadway Bridge. Under the original and modi- 
fied projects a total of 531,022 cubic yards of material was removed 
prior to June 30, 1912. Prior to July 1, 1915, a total of $178,914.20 
had been expended on the original project and its modifications, of 
which amount it is estimated that $148,666.74 was for new work 
and $30,247.46 was for maintenance. 

11. GREAT SOUTH BAY, N. Y. 

Prior to the improvement of Patchogue River by the United 
States its mouth was obstructed by a bar with a depth of 1.5 feet at 
mean low water, mean range of tide about 1 foot. Not only was 
freight traffic practically impossible, but the oyster and fishing fleet 
was frequently compelled to weather storms and ice in the open bay= 
The improvement contemplated the relief of such conditions by a 
dredged channel 60 feet wide and 6 feet deep at mean low water from 
the 6-foot contour in Great South Bay to the head of navigation, at 
Division Street, in the village of Patchogue, and a stone jetty or 
breakwater 1,700 feet long on the west side to protect the mouth of 
the river. The initial project was adopted by the river and harbor 
act of September 19, 1890, at an estimated cost of $40,000. (Annual 
Report for 1887, p. 759.) 



1774 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

The first work of improvement was the construction of the jetty, 
which was begun in 1890, and in 1891 was completed for a length of 
1,340 feet, terminating in 4.5 feet of water. In 1897 the jetty was 
extended to the projected length of 1,700 feet, about 6,400 tons of 
stone having been placed in the structure. It was of scant cross 
section, having a top width of 3 feet and an elevation of two feet 
above high water. The first dredging was begun in 1891. and opera- 
tions were carried on under various contracts until a channel 6 feet 
deep and 60 feet wide, with a turning basin 100 feet wide at the 
head of navigation, was secured in 1897. 

In 1893 the width at the entrance was increased to 85 feet by 
dredging off a point on the east side at the mouth of the river, and 
private parties had a small channel dredged east of the one dredged 
by the United States. In the same year the middle ground between 
these two channels was removed, which resulted in increasing the 
width of the channel to about 150 feet and made a small area avail- 
able for anchorage purposes. Under the original project a total of 
84,172 cubic yards of material was removed, of which about 16,000 
cubic yards was chargeable to maintenance. A total of $40,000 was 
expended. 

HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE THIRD NEW 
YORK, N. Y., DISTRICT. 



1. NEWARK BAY AND PASSAIC RIVER, N. J. 

On August 30, 1852, $10,000 was appropriated by Congress for the 
improvement of Newark Bay, and $2,000 was appropriated for the 
survey of same. The survey was made and report rendered under 
date of January 27, 1853. There is no record in this office that shows 
whether work of improvement was done, or what disposition was 
made of the funds. 

The first project for the improvement of Passaic River was adopted 
by the river and harbor act approved June 10, 1872 (with subse- 
quent modifications), and now exists in part. It provides for mak- 
ing a channel by dredging and diking from the Center Street Bridge, 
Newark, to the highway bridge at Passaic, which is about 3^ miles 
below the Dundee Dam. The length of the channel is about 8£ 
miles. The width to be made was from 50 to 200 feet, and the depth 
6 to 7i feet at mean low water. The mean range of tides at the 
Montclair & Greenwood Lake Railroad bridge is 5 feet, and at 
Passaic 4.6 feet. The original estimate of the cost was $123,924. 
This was subsequently increased in 1890 to $193,822. (See S. Doc. 
No. 35, 42d Cong.. 2d sess., and Annual Report for 1872, p. 807.) 

The second project, now covered by a third project, was adopted 
by the river and harbor act approved June 14. 1880, for improving 
the Passaic River from the Center Street Bridge to project depth 
in Newark Bay, about 5 miles in distance. It provided for making 
a channel 200 feet wide and 10 feet deep at mean low water by diking 
and dredging. The mean range of tides in this section of the river 
is 5 feet. The original estimated cost was $353,875. (See Annual 
Report for 1880, p.^537.) 



APPENDIX. 1775 

The first two projects were consolidated by the river and harbor 
act of July 13, 1892; the estimated cost of the improvement was 
revised to $547,697. (See Annual Report for 1893, p. 1108.) 

The third project was adopted by the river and harbor act ap- 
proved June 13, 1902. It provides for making a channel by dredging 
and diking from Staten Island Sound through Newark Bay and 
the Passaic River to the Montclair & Greenwood Lake Railroad 
bridge 200 feet in width and 12 feet deep at mean low water to the 
Nairn linoleum works, thence 10 feet deep to the said railroad bridge, 
a distance of 10.8 miles. The mean range of tides is 5 feet. The 
estimated original cost was $296,000, annual maintenance $5,000. 
This was subsequently increased to $323,274.60, annual maintenance 
$10,000, additional funds having been appropriated by the river and 
harbor act of March 3, 1905. (See H. Doc. No. 401, 56th Cong., 1st 
sess., and Annual Report for 1900, p. 1530.) 

The fourth project was adopted by the river and harbor act ap- 
proved March 2, 1907, and it provides for making a channel by 
dredging 16 feet deep at mean low water, 300 feet wide from deep 
water in Newark Bay to the Nairn linoleum works, 9.7 miles, thence 
200 feet wide to the Montclair & Greenwood Lake Railroad bridge, 
1.1 miles. The mean range of tides is 5 feet. It was estimated to 
cost $1,216,775; annual maintenance, $10,000. (See H. Doc. No. 441, 
59th Cong., 2d sess., and Annual Report for 1907, p. 175.) 

The river and harbor act of February 27, 1911, provided that the 
project for improvement below said bridge may, in the discretion 
of the Secretary of War, be so modified as to allow the widening 
of the channel at the bends where considered desirable in the inter- 
ests of commerce and navigation ; also that the cost of the project 
shall not be increased by such additional work beyond that stated in 
House Document No. 441, Fifty-ninth Congress, second session. 

The fifth project was adopted by the river and harbor act ap- 
proved July 25, 1912. It provides for increasing the depth by dredg- 
ing in Newark Bay and Passaic River to 20 feet at mean low water, 
and 300 feet wide to the Nairn linoleum works, about 10.3 miles; 
thence 16 feet deep and 200 feet wide to the Montclair & Greenwood 
Lake Railroad bridge, 1.1 mjles, in accordance with the provisions 
of the project of 1907. The mean range of tides is 5 feet. The esti- 
mated cost of the project is $1,064,800, with an annual maintenance 
cost of $20,000. (See H. Doc. No. 707, 62d Cong., 2d sess., and 
Annual Report for 1912, p. 279.) 

Further details as to this improvement may be found in the Annual 
Reports of the Chief of Engineers for 1896, pages 770 to 774, and 
for 1900, pages 177 and 1530 to 1550. 

3. ARTHUR KILL, OR STATEN ISLAND SOUND, N. Y. AND N. J., AND 
CHANNEL NORTH OF SHOOTERS ISLAND, BETWEEN NEW YORK 
AND NEW JERSEY. 

The first project, under title of " Channel between Staten Island 
and New Jersey," was adopted under authority of the river and 
harbor act of June 23, 1874. It provides for making and maintaining 
a channel by diking and dredging through a stretch of about If miles 
where the waters of Newark Bay join those of the Kills, the channel 
to be 150 feet wide and 16 feet deep at mean low water. The channel 



1776 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

is to take a course north of Shooters Island. The mean range of 
tides is about 5 feet. The estimated original cost of the improvement 
was $443,210. Under the project 2.237 linear feet of dike were built. 
(See Annual Eeport for 1873, p. 943, and S. Doc. No. 52, 42d Cong., 
3d sess.) 

According to the act of March 3, 1875, a board was appointed by 
the Secretary of War with authority to modify the original plan of 
improvement. A modification was made providing for a width of 
about 500 feet and depth of 11 feet by dredging. The channel was to 
follow the general lines of the original channel south of Shooters 
Island. The estimated cost was $40,480. No work was done under 
the modification. (See Annual Report for 1876, p. 252.) 

The second project, under title of " Channel between Staten Island 
and New Jersey," was adopted by the act of June 14, 1880. It pro- 
vided for making and maintaining a channel by diking and dredging 
along the route of original natural channel south of Shooters Island, 
over the flats at the base of Newark Bay, the length to be about If 
miles, width to be 400 feet; the center 200 feet of channel to have a 
depth of 13 feet at mean low water; the remaining widths of the 
channel to be made 12 feet deep. The mean range of tides is about 
5 feet. The estimated original cost was $185,705. (See Annual 
Report for 1881, p. 693.) 

The project was modified in 1883 on recommendation of the Chief 
of Engineers (Annual Report for 1883, p. 575). The modification 
provided for making 13 feet depth over the full width of 400 feet. 
The estimated cost was $210,000, of which $60,000 was for dikes. 

The project was further modified by act of May 15, 1889, when the 
dikes as proposed under the project were abandoned. No work was 
done on them under this project. 

The project was again modified by the act of October 20, 1890, 
when the depth was increased to 14 feet at mean low water. 

By the river and harbor acts of June 3, 1896. and June 13, 1902, 
the project was further extended to include the dredging of a chan-. 
nel in Lemon Creek, Staten Island, at a cost of $5,000 and $5,000, 
respectively. This was to provide for dredging a channel 8 feet deep 
at mean high water and 50 feet wide from deep water in Princess 
Bay to the drawbridge; thence 35 feet wide as far up as the appro- 
priations would carry. Under this project the channel dimensions 
as projected and modified have been completed. No dikes were built. 
Work for maintenance was done. 

The third project, under title of "Improving Arthur Kill, New 
York and New Jersey," was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
August 11, 1888. This project was in a degree supplemental to the 
project of 1880. It provided for the straightening of and dredging 
the channel in the vicinity of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad bridge 
at Elizabethport, and removing a point of land westerly of same 
known as Steep Point. The estimated cost of this improvement was 
$26,500. The project was completed January 24, 1S95, at a cost of 
$25,407.23. (See S. Doc. No. 17, 49th Cong., 2d sess., and Annual 
Report for 1887, p. 2632.) 

The fourth project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
June 13, 1902. It provided for making and maintaining a channel 
from Kill von Kull to Raritan Bay, a distance of about 14 miles, by 
means of dredging and diking 300 feet wide and 21 feet deep at mean 



APPENDIX. 1777 

low water. Mean range of tides is about 5 feet. The estimated cost 
was $696,000 and $5,000 annual cost for maintenance, which was 
subsequently increased to $25,000. (See H. Doc. No. 337, 59th Cong., 
2d sess.) The project has been completed. Work for maintenance 
has been done. No dikes have been built. (See H. Doc. No. 393, 56th 
Cong., 1st sess., and Annual Report for 1900, p. 1525.) 

The fifth project, under title of " Channel north of Shooters Island 
between New York and New Jersey," was adopted by the river and 
harbor act approved June 25, 1910. It is an extension of the project 
of 1902, and provides for a channel about 1 mile in length connecting 
the main channel of Arthur Kill at the Corner Stake Light with 
Newark Bay, lying north of Shooters Island, the channel to be. 300 
feet wide and 16 feet deep at mean low water. This project also 
included the removal of a middle ground in the main channel of 
Newark Bay, northeast of Shooters Island between Bergen Point 
and Shooters Island ; the removal of a part of Bergen Point Reef, 
and a middle ground at Corner Stake Light, the depth to be 16 feet 
at mean low water. The main range of tides is about 5 feet. The 
estimated cost was $280,115, with $5,000 annually for maintenance. 
(See H. Doc. No. 337, 59th Cong., 2d sess., and Annual Report for 
1907, p. 175.) 

The sixth project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
March 4, 1913. It provides for securing a channel 25 feet deep at 
mean low water and a width of 400 feet ty dredging and rock re- 
moval from Perth Amboy to east end of Shooters Island joining 
Kill van Kull, with a suitable turning basin of the same depth at the 
mouth of Fresh Kills. Estimated cost $2,130,000, and $50,000 an- 
nually for maintenance. (See H. Doc. No. 337, 59th Cong., 2d sess.) 

Detailed descriptions of this waterway and the projects for its im : 
provement are printed in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engi- 
neers for 1900, pages 178 and 1525 to 1530; in House Document No. 
1124, Sixty-second Congress, third session, and House Document No. 
337, Fifty-ninth Congress, second session. 

4. WOODBRIDGE CREEK, N. J. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1879. It provided for dredging a channel 12 feet deep 
at mean high water and 80 feet wide from the mouth of the creek 
to Salamander Dock, 1.8 miles distant, and the building of about 
500 feet of pile dike in the vicinity of Town Dock. The mean range 
of tides is about 5 feet. The estimated cost of the improvement was 
$13,800, which amount was increased in 1884 to $29,000. The project 
was suspended in 1883. (See Annual Report for 1879, p. 478.) 

6. KEYPORT HARBOR, MATAWAN CREEK, RARITAN, SOUTH AND 
ELIZABETH RIVERS, SHOAL HARBOR AND COMPTON CREEK, AND 
CHEESEQUAKE CREEK, N. J. 

(c) RARITAN RIVER, N. J. 

A survey of the Raritan River for the improvement of New 
Brunswick Harbor was made in 1836, and in the following year" 
$13,963 was appropriated for this work, but the records of this office 
do not show what work was done. 
8373°— eng 1915 112 



1778 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 
(d) SOUTH RIVER, N. J. 

The first project for this improvement was adopted by the river 
and harbor act of March 3, 1871. The project provided for dredging 
a channel 6 feet deep at mean low water up to the \Yashington 
wharves, a distance of about H miles. The width to be made was 
indefinite, but the survey on which the improvement was based recom- 
mended the original width of 80 feet, as made when the Washington 
Canal was dug about 40 years prior to this time by the New Jersey 
Transportation Co. The mean range of tides is about 5.34 feet. 
This improvement was completed in 1874. Amount expended on 
improvement $20,000. (See H. Doc. No. 60, 41st Cong., 3d sess., 
and Annual Eeport for 1871, p. 698.) 

(e) ELIZABETH RIVER, N. J. 

The original project was adopted March 3, 1879. It consisted 
in dredging a channel 60 feet wide and 7 feet deep at mean high 
water to Broad Street, Elizabeth, a distance of about 2£ miles. The 
mean range of tides at the mouth is 4.7 feet, and at Bridge Street, 
Elizabeth, 3.4 feet. The original estimate of cost was $25,530. This 
was revised in 1881 to $43,160. This project was completed in 1897, 
and it was dropped from the list of works June 30, 1911, the upper 
part of the river having fallen into disuse as a navigable stream, 
and was used as a sewer outlet by the city of Elizabeth. (See Annual 
Report for 1870, p. 481.) 

For details of the improvement see Annual Eeport of the Chief 
of Engineers for 1897, page 1134. 

7. SHREWSBURY RIVER, N. J. 

By act of Congress of August 30, 1852, $1,500 was appropriated 
and expended upon a survey to ascertain the extent of a break 
through the beach between Shrewsbury Elver and the ocean, but 
no work of improvement was begun. 

The first project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1871. It provided for dredging a 6-foot channel through 
a bar opposite and four bars above the Xavesink Lights. The esti- 
mated cost of this improvement was $14,000. The work was done 
as proposed and a bar near Lower Rocky Point was removed. The 
work was completed in 1873 at a cost of $19,000. (See H. Doc. No. 00, 
41st Cong., 3d sess., and Annual Eeport for 1871, p. 702.) 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE PHILADELPHIA, 
PA., DISTRICT. 



3. DELAWARE RIVER, PA. AND N. J., PHILADELPHIA, PA., TO TREN- 
TON, N. J. 

- Prior to the adoption by the river and harbor act of June 25. 1910, 
of the project for a channel 200 feet wide and 12 feet deep from 
Allegheny Avenue, Philadelphia, to Trenton. X. J., efforts were 
directed toward relieving navigation from obstructions which existed 



APPENDIX. 1779 

in the upper 9 miles of the river between Kinkora Bar and Trenton, 
particularly, under various appropriations aggregating $101,000 
made by Congress during the period from June 10, 1872, to July 5, 
1881, for improving the river between Trenton and Bordentown, 
between Trenton and Whitehill, and between Trenton, N. J., and 
Bridesburg, Pa. A channel 150 feet wide and 6 feet deep at mean 
low water was dredged through Perriwig Bar and a channel about 
7$ feet deep at mean low water and 200 feet wide was constructed 
through the bar in the vicinity of Bordentown, N. J. 

During 1890 a channel about 175 feet wide and 12 feet deep at 
mean low water was dredged through Kinkora Bar. A dike extend- 
ing downstream from the lower end of Xewbold Island was con- 
structed with a view to assisting in the maintenance of this channel. 
The improvement, however, did not prove permanent, and it was 
found in 1893 that the channel had shoaled to about 7^ feet at mean 
low water. 

By 1895 all traces of the improvements made previous to that 
time had disappeared. The river had practically returned to its 
original condition, and efforts toward improvements between Bor- 
dentown and Trenton had been failures. 

During 1895 and 1896 a channel from 80 to 200 feet wide and 6 feet 
deep at mean low water was dredged through Perriwig Bar. 

Expenditures to June 30, 1907, in connection with the various im- 
provements of the river between Philadelphia and Trenton, amounted 
to $121,500. 

A project for the construction of a channel 7 feet deep at mean 
low water and 200 feet wide through Perriwig Bar was adopted by 
the river and harbor act of March 2, 1907, in accordance with the 
plan printed in House Document No. 852, Fifty-ninth Congress, 
second session. The work under this project was completed during 
the fiscal year 1908 at a cost of $50,585.94. 

A channel 160 feet wide. 7 feet deep at mean low water, and about 
3.600 feet long was dredged through the bar in the vicinity of Bor- 
dentown during the summer of 1909 at a cost of $10,000. During the 
fiscal year 1910 a channel 800 feet long, 200 feet wide, and 7 feet 
deep at mean low water was dredged through Sewer Shoal just below 
Trenton at a cost of $12,537.31. 

The total amount expended on all previous projects in the Dela- 
ware River between Philadelphia and Trenton from 1872 to 1910 
was $197,623.25. 

4. DELAWARE RIVER, PA., N. J., AND DEL., PHILADELPHIA, PA., 
TO THE SEA. 

The act of Congress approved July 4, 1836, appropriated the sum 
of $15,000 " For removing the bar on the River Delaware, in the 
neighborhood of Fort Mifflin, with the. view of improving the harbor 
of Philadelphia," which marked the beginning of the improvement 
of the channel of the Delaware River by the General Government. 
No further work on the channel was undertaken until 1872, when 
Congress appropriated the sum of $10,000 for improving the channel 
of the river between Trenton and Bordentown, N. J. Between 1872 
and 1885 the work of improving the channel was confined to the 
removal of shoals and bars, except at Schooner Ledge, where solid 



1780 



REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 



rock was removed. The work was carried on under appropriations 
for special localities and under general appropriations tor improving 
the river below Trenton. The operations rallied on between 1836 
and 1885, with the amount of money expended on each, are shown 
in the following tabular list: 



Locality. 


Period. 


K\ [.ended. 




1875 1878 
1876-1880 
1879 1885 
1879 1886 
1879 1886 
1881 1885 


5135,000.00 
35,000.00 




Improvement of channel of the Delaware River at and near the llorseh' " 

Improvement of the Delaware River between 1'ettys Island and its mouth 

Improvement ol the Delaware River, N. J., between Trenton and White Hill.. 


.-,00.110 

25,997.58 
172, 1 I0.8S 




170,000.00 




100,000.00 


Improving Delaware River between Trenton, N. J., and Bridesburg, Pa 




Total 




1,352,000.00 









A comprehensive project for the permanent and systematic im- 
provement of the river from a point about one-fourth mile below 
Allegheny Avenue, Philadelphia, Pa., to deep water in Delaware 
Bay, by the construction of a channel 26 feet deep at mean low water 
and 600 feet wide, was submitted on January 23, 1885, by a board 
of engineers appointed for that purpose (see Report of the Chief of 
Engineers for 1885, p. 822). It was proposed to secure the channel 
under this project by dredging wherever necessary, by the construc- 
tion of dikes for the contraction or regulation of the tidal flow, and 
by the removal of rock obstructing the channel at Schooner Ledge, 
just below the city of Chester, Pa. The estimated cost of securing 
this channel was $2,425,000. Work under this project was commenced 
in 1885 and continued until superseded by a later project. The 
amount expended in connection with the 26-foot project was $1,532,- 
688.81, of which amount $200,000 is estimated to have been applied 
to maintenance. 

During the existence of the 26-foot project the sum of $146,963.26 
was expended in deepening the channel across Smiths Island Bar, 
between Philadelphia and Camden, in rebuilding and enlarging the 
dike at the junction of the Delaware and Schuylkill Rivers, for 
dredging at various localities between Philadelphia, Pa., and Tren- 
ton, N. J., and for minor purposes not considered a part of the 26-foot 
project. 

A comprehensive project for the improvement of Philadelphia 
Harbor was adopted August 11, 1888 (see II. Ex. Doc. No. 260, 50th 
Cong., 2d sess.), and the work was completed on January 10, 1898. 
Under this project a channel varying in width from 1,015 to L,850 
feet, with a least depth of 26 feet at mean low water, except over the 
Mameluke Rock area in the upper part of the harbor, over which 
the depth was slightly less than 26 feet, was secured from a point 
opposite Morris Street, Philadelphia, to the Pennsylvania Railroad 
bridge at Delair, N. J., a distance of about 6.2 miles. Final report 
on the completion of this project is published in the Annual Report 
of the Chief of Engineers for 1890, page 1330. The total amount 
expended in connection with this project, including survey of the 
locality, the acquisition of land, and the work done under the allot- 



APPENDIX. 1781 

ment of $10,000 made from the emergency appropriation contained 
in the river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, was $3,915,424.75. 

The 26-foot project of 1885 was superseded by a project providing 
for a channel 30 feet deep at mean low water, with a width of 600 
feet, from Christian Street., Philadelphia, to deep water in Delaware 
Bay. adopted March 3, 1899, in accordance with report printed in 
House Document No. 219, Fiftj'-fifth Congress, second session. It- 
was estimated that it would cost $5,810,000 to complete this work. 
Work under this project was commenced in 1900 and practically 
completed at the end of March, 1911. The amount expended under 
this project was $7,144,350.01, of which amount $6,318,940.99 was for 
new work and $825,409.02 was for maintenance. 

The total amount expended under all previous projects for im- 
proving the river from 1836 to the time of the adoption of the ex- 
isting project, in 1910, including the sum expended on Philadelphia 
Harbor, was $14,121,426.83. 

5. ICE HARBOR AT MARCUS HOOK, PA. 

The State of Pennsylvania, in 1785, through the agency of the 
wardens of the port of Philadelphia, constructed four piers and 
widened an old wharf at Marcus Hook " to shelter shipping." An 
agreement was made in 1785 between the Commonwealth and the 
holders of land at Marcus Hook which contained, among other con- 
ditions, " to permit and suffer all persons whatsoever to pass and re- 
pass across and along their respective wharfs and to permit and 
suffer all vessels lying at the public piers to load and discharge their 
cargoes without any let, hindrance, or molestation by or from them, 
or any or either of them, or their, or any or either of their heirs, 
executors, administrators, or assigns." 

On September 29, 1789, the general assembly of the Common- 
wealth ceded to the United States " all right, title, property, and 
interest of this Commonwealth in and to * * * all * * * 
public piers now erected, placed, or sunk in the Bay and River Dela- 
ware, for the improvement and safety of the navigation thereof, 
* * * together with all the lands and tenements thereunto be- 
longing * * * as fully, absolutely, and to the same extent, as 
this Commonwealth now holds and is entitled in and to the same, 
together with the jurisdiction thereof, so far as this Commonwealth 
hath or had right to exercise jurisdiction over the whole or any part 
of the same." 

In the act of March 2, 1827, $100 was appropriated " for defraying 
the expenses of an examination of the public piers at Port Penn, 
Marcus Hook, and Fort Mifflin, in the River Delaware, in the States 
of Pennsylvania and Delaware, in order to determine the expediency 
and expense of repairing and improving the same." 

The act of May 23, 1828, appropriated $4,413 " for repairing the 
public piers at Port Penn, Marcus Hook, and Fort Mifflin." The 
act of March 2, 1829, appropriated $5,000 for " repairing the piers 
at Marcus Hook, for filling up the sluice between the said piers, and 
improving the harbor of Marcus Hook by the removal of obstruc- 
tions." The act of April 23, 1830, "for improving the harbors of 
New Castle, Marcus Hook, Chester, and Port Penn, in the Delaware 
River, ten thousand dollars." Act of March 2, 1831, "for improv- 



1782 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

ing the harbors of New Castle, Marcus Hook, Chester, and Port 
Penn, in the Delaware River, $1,000." Act of July 3, 1832, " for im- 
proving the harbors of New Castle. Marcus Hook, Chester, and Port 
Penn, on the Delaware, ten thousand dollars." Act of March 2, 1833, 
for same harbors " in the Delaware," $4,000. Act of June 28, 1834, 
for same harbors, $6,133. Act of March 3, 1835, for same harbors 
"in addition to balance of former appropriation, $(5,000." 

It is probable that reports upon the work done under the appro- 
priations of 1829 to 1835 will be found in congressional documents 
of that period, none of which are on file in this office. The follow- 
ing resolution enacted January 22, 1846, by the general assembly of 
the Commonwealth is of interest in this connection : 

Whereas, The piers in the River Delaware, at Marcus ilook, were ceded by 
this Commonwealth to the Government of the United States, on condition that 
the said Government should keep them in good and perfect repair : And 
whereas, The said piers are now in such condition as to render them almost 
useless for the public accommodation and convenience, the appropriation made 
several years since by Congress for the repairs of these piers and the protec- 
tion of the harbor having been chiefly expended in procuring costly stone for 
the said piers, which was afterwards removed and applied to the erection of 
piers at New Castle, in the State of Delaware, thus removing the appropriation 
made for a national object in Pennsylvania to a neighboring State, where the 
appropriations were much larger : Therefore, 

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Commonwealth 
of Pennsylvania in general assembly met, That our Senators and Representa- 
tives in Congress be requested to insist upon the obligation of the General 
Government to keep the piers in the River Delaware at Marcus Hook in good 
order, and also to take such measures as will insure the proper repair of these 
piers by an appropriation equal to that which was explicitly made for this 
purpose, but which was abstracted to build piers in an adjoining State. 

Resolved, That the governor be requested to transmit a copy of these reso- 
lutions to each of our Senators and Representatives in Congress. 

The act of June 23, 1866, " For repairs of Government wharves and 
landings and improving harbor at Marcus Hook, on Delaware River, 
Pennsylvania, five thousand dollars: Prodded, That before expenses 
shall be incurred on said wharves and landings it shall be shown to 
the satisfaction of the Secretary of War that the same belong to the 
United States." Act of March 2, 1867, " For improving harbor of 
Marcus Hook, Pennsylvania, $94,000." It is to be presumed that the 
ownership of the United States was satisfactorily established. 

Major Stewart submitted a report and project under date of No- 
vember 27, 1866, and an abstract of proposals for doing the work. 
He proposed to repair the old wharves, to build a wooden pier and 
bridge and four stone piers, at a total estimated cost of $84,000. The. 
work was completed in 1871. 

The next appropriation was made by act of June 14, 1880, " For 
ice harbor at Marcus Hook, Pennsylvania, commencing enlargement 
of piers and dredging, $35,000." 

Previous to the above act, examinations and surveys were required 
by the acts of 1875 and 1879 as well as the act of 1827. The report 
made in compliance with the first act (1875) is found on pnge 181, 
volume 2, Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for ls7.». and on 
the second act on page 611, Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers 
for 1880 (also Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 80, 46th Cong., 2d sess.)/ Until 
a new project was adopted by the act of June 14, 1880, the expendi- 
tures annually made were for repairs to the ice piers and for dredg- 
ing. A plan showing the condition of the ice harbor in 1879 will be 



APPENDIX. 1783 

found in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1879 oppo- 
site page 141. The new project provided for dredging and the con- 
struction of two additional ice piers, at a total cost of $90,000. The 
two piers were completed in October, 1881, at a cost of about $21,000. 

A modification of the project of 1880 was proposed October 6, 1881 
(see Animal Eeport of the Chief of Engineers, 1882, p. 751 et seq.), 
for building one additional pier, constructing a bulkhead along the 
whole length of the harbor (about 1,800 feet), and for dredging, at a 
total estimated cost of $71,000. 

The act of August 2, 18S2, approved the above project, the addi- 
tional pier (Xo. 7) being completed in November, 1883. In the 
meantime one of the piers (Xo. 5) was wrecked and had to be rebuilt. 
During the year 1886 some dredging was done in the harbor to depths 
of 22 and 21 feet. Two groups of mooring piles were also placed. 
In 1887 Pier Xo. 6 was rebuilt in a new location and dredging was 
done which rendered available about 8 acres of harbor area, with a 
depth varying from 8 to 24 feet. 

In 1888 the district officer, for reasons stated (see Annual Report 
of the Chief of Engineers, 1888, page 701 et seq.), recommended the 
abandonment of the bulkhead and dredging to a greater depth. A 
sketch of the harbor will be found opposite page 702 of that report. 
The acts of 1888 and 1890 appropriated funds for "Improving ice 
harbor at Marcus Hook, Pennsylvania; continuing improvement." 
It would appear therefore that the project of 1888 was not distinctly 
approved by Congress. Xevertheless the project as proposed by Col. 
Henry M. Robert in a letter dated August 9, 1888, was carried out 
and practically completed in 1889 (see Annual Report of the Chief 
of Engineers, 1889, p. 866). His project included also extensive 
repairs to the piers. 

On Xovember 13, 1901, a revocable license was granted by the Sec- 
retary of War to Mr. Joseph X. Pew, of Pittsburgh, Pa., to erect 
and maintain a wharf at Marcus Hook. The location of the wharf 
included the two lower ice piers, as shown on plan opposite page 1046, 
Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1902. The wharf was 
afterwards extended. Rules for the use of the landing piers were 
approved by the Acting Secretary of War under date of April 
29, 1904. 

6. CONSTRUCTING PIER IN DELAWARE BAY, NEAR LEWES, DEL. 

Prior to the adoption by the river and harbor act of July 15, 1870, 
of the project for the existing iron pier, there was a wooden pile 
landing pier about 1,200 feet long and 20 feet wide, having a depth 
of 8 feet of water at its outer end, which was constructed at this 
locality in 1837. This pier was erected for the purpose of providing 
communication with the shore for vessels coming to the harbor, so 
that provisions and supplies could be obtained and also to give access 
to lines of travel and afford mail accommodations. This structure 
was guarded by a series of six ice-breaker piers on the seaward side 
and a like series on the inner side placed 100 to 150 feet apart at dis- 
tances of 75 feet from the landing pier. This structure cost about 
$60,000 and endured about 12 years. Its failure was caused by a 
vessel which broke through it after the piles had been honeycombed 
by boring worms. 



1784 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, TJ. S. ARMY. 

HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE WILMINGTON, 
DEL, DISTRICT. 



3. MANTUA CREEK, N. J. 

The original project, adopted by the river and harbor act of 
August 2, 1882, was for a channel 10 feet deep at mean low water and 
80 feet wide at the mouth, diminishing to 1 feet deep at mean low 
water and 40 feet wide at Mantua. No work was done under this 
plan. The appropriation carried by the act was $3,000. In 1889 the 
project was modified to provide for a channel not less than 8 feet 
deep at mean low water and 60 feet wide from the Delaware River 
upstream 3,000 feet, and in 1889-90 the aforementioned channel was 
dredged with the funds provided by the act of 1882. The amount of 
dredging was 20,000 cubic Awards. 

4. RACCOON CREEK, N. J. 

The original project adopted by the river and harbor act of August 

2, 1882, was for a channel 4 feet deep at mean low water and 40 feet 
wide from the mouth to Springers Wharf and 3 feet deep at mean 
low water and 40 feet wide thence to the fixed highway bridge at 
Swedesboro. In adopting the project Congress appropriated $3,000 
with which to start the work. The estimate of the cost of the work 
was $17,940. A survey of the creek was made at a cost of $7.") 7.23. 
No work was done under this project, nor further appropriations 
made. 

6. SALEM RIVER, N. J. 

The original project adopted by the river and harbor act of March 

3, 1871, which carried an appropriation of $4,000, was for the re- 
moval of rock from the channel at the mouth to a depth of 9 feet at 
mean low water and a width of 200 feet. It was modified in 1878 to 
include the removal of a sand bar and other obstructions to a depth 
of 8 feet at mean low water. The rock was removed and the channel 
completed in 1881. Thereafter operations in Salem River to 1895 
were confined to the portion of the river between the head of naviga- 
tion and the Salem Canal, which in 1872 was dug by private enter- 
prise, under authority from the State of New Jersey, from the point 
where the course of Salem River approached nearest the Delaware 
River to the Delaware River. This locality is just below Deep Water 
Point on the Delaware River and about 10 miles above the natural 
mouth of Salem River. In Salem River, just below the inner end of 
the canal and in connection with the digging of the canal, a dam was« 
constructed, thus creating two distinct streams. Prior to the adop- 
tion of the present project, $17,209.31 was expended on the entire 
Salem River; $10,000 was applied to the channel in Salem Cove, 
which was dredged to a depth of 8 feet and a width of 100 feet, in- 
cluding the removal of the rock, which proved to be bowlders: and 
$7,209.34 was expended in making a channel 6 feet deep at mean low 
water and 50 feet wide from Hoxies Landing to the Salem Canal, irj 
the upper river, which has been a separate stream since 1872. 



APPENDIX. 1785 

8. COHANSEY RIVER, N. J. 

The original project, adopted by the river and harbor act of March 
3. 1873, was for a channel 4 feet deep at mean low water and 130 
feet wide from deep water to the lower steamboat landing at Broad 
Street Bridge, and thence 3 feet deep, width not given, to the Nail 
Works Bridge at the head of navigation. The project was modi- 
fied in 1879 to make the channel 5 to 7 feet deep at mean low water 
and 80 feet wide. Dredging operations were carried on from 1873 
to 1881, in which time 63,532 cubic yards of dredged material were 
removed and the improved channel completed. The amount ex- 
pended on the improvement was $36,000. 

9. MAURICE RIVER, N. J. 

The original project adopted by the river and harbor act of August 
2, 1882. was for a channel 6 feet deep at mean low water and 100 
feet wide from Frenchs Bar, 4 miles below Millville, to Millville 
drawbridge, and thence 4 feet deep at mean low water and 50 to 
100 feet wide to the head of navigation about 3,000 feet. The project 
was modified in 1890 to extend the 6-foot depth to the head of navi- 
gation, and in 1892 to extend the head of navigation 500 feet. Oper- 
ations were in progress from 1885 to 1892, and in that time 232,473 
cubic yards of material were excavated in the improvement of the 
channel. The amount expended on the improvement under the 
previous project and modifications was $43,000. 

15. WILMINGTON HARBOR, DEL. 

Dredging operations were carried on in the Christiana River be- 
tween 1836 and 1840, upon which was expended the sum of $32,356. 
The original project, adopted in 1870, was for a channel 12 feet deep 
at extreme low water, 200 feet wide from the Delaware River to the 
mouth of the Brandywine and 100 feet wide thence to Market Street 
Bridge, a distance of 3.1 miles. In 1881 this project was modified 
to provide a channel 15 feet deep at mean low water from the mouth 
to the pulp works, a distance of about 4.2 miles, and 12 feet deep 
thence for about 1.3 miles to the Delaware Railroad bridge, includ- 
ing rock removal at Third Street Bridge and a jetty at the mouth. 
It was again modified in 1883 to give a uniform width of 150 feet 
from the mouth to the pulp works, and again in 1884, to give an 
additional height of 4 feet to the jetty and an addition thereto of 
322 feet. This project was completed in 1897, with the exception of 
the 12-foot channel 100 feet wide from the pulp works to the Dela- 
ware Railroad bridge, which work was never done, and the 322-foot 
extension to the jetty which was constructed after the adoption of 
the present project. The amount expended on the project of 1881 
and its modifications was $369,765.21, making a total of $402,121.21 
expenditure on projects previous to the existing project. 

The river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, provided that $5,000 of 
the $20,000 appropriated by that act for Wilmington Harbor should 
be applied to dredging between Churchmans Bridge and Smalleys 
Dam, 11 and 16 miles, respectively, from the mouth of Christiana 



1786 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

River, during the year 1896. A channel 3 feet deep and 25 feet wide 
was dredged 3.35 miles upstream toward Christiana Village and 
from Christiana Village toward Smalleys dam, a distance of about 
4,000 feet. The work was uncompleted at the end of 1896 in both 
sections and was never finished. 

16. APPOQUINIMINK, MURDERKILL, AND MISPILLION RIVERS. DEL. 

(c) MISPILLION RIVER. 

The original project was adopted in the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1879. It was for a channel 6 feet deep at mean low water 
and 40 feet wide from Delaware Bay to Milford. Operations were 
begun in 1879 and continued to 1889 when the project was completed 
at a cost of $17,000. A second project was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of July 13, 1892, for a channel across the bar outside of 
the mouth 6 feet deep at mean low water and 150 feet wide, the 
dredged material to form a protective bank on the northern side of 
the cut. This project was modified by the authority of the Chief of 
Engineers, July 3, 1893, to provide for the strengthening of the in- 
shore end of the protective bank with a pile dike filled with brush. 
It later developed that, the dredged material being largely sand, the 
protecting bank would not stand, and 1,490 feet of jetty on the north 
side and 1,080 feet on the south side were constructed as a protection 
to the entrance channel. Operations under this project extended 
from 1893 to the adoption of the present project in 1907. The ex- 
penditures under this project amounted to $61,650, making a total 
of expenditures of $78,650 upon previous projects. 

17. SMYRNA RIVER, DEL. 

The original project adopted in the river and harbor act of June 
14, 1880, was for a channel across the bar outside of the mouth and 
the removal of various shoals in the river to a depth of 8 feet at mean 
low water and widths varying from 50 to 100 feet. The work under 
this project was confined to the removal of the shoals in the river, 
no work being done on the bar at the mouth, and extended from 1880 
to 1883. The amount expended on this project was $5,842.63. A 
second project adopted by the river and harbor act of August 11, 
1888, was for a channel 7 feet deep at mean low water 100 feet wide 
across the bar outside of the mouth, protected by a stone jetty, ami 
60 feet wide in the river. A third project adopted by the river and 
harbor act of June 13, 1902, was for two cut-offs 7 feet dee]) at mean 
low water and 60 feet wide near the head of the river. This project 
was a modification of the second project. A modification by the 
river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, changed the location of the 
cut-offs as the original location was discovered to be detrimental to 
some shipping interests. Operations on this project extended from 
1888 to 1910. when the present project was adopted and the improve- 
ment, including the cut-offs, but exclusive of the stone jetty at the 
mouth, was completed. The amount expended on this project was 
$71,965, making a total expended on previous projects of $77,807.63. 



APPENDIX. 1787 

20. ST. JONES RIVER, DEL. 

The original project adopted by the river and harbor act of March 
3, 1881, was for a channel 3 feet deep at mean low water and 100 
feet wide across the bar at the mouth to be protected by a jetty. A 
modification in 1881 included the removal of shoals in the river to a 
depth of 6 feet at mean low water between the mouth and Dover, 
and the cutting off of sharp bends. A modification in 1889 dispensed 
with the stone jetty, substituting banks thrown up along the sides of 
the cut, and included the dredging of a cut-off near Whartons 
Fishery, about 1 mile below Lebanon. Operations under this project 
and its modifications extended from 1881 to 1891, when the improve- 
ment was completed. From that date to 1910, when the present 
project was adopted, the improvement has been maintained as far as 
Lebanon, which is the head of ste.miboat navigation. The amount 
expended on this project and its maintenance was $70,556.50. 

21. BROADKILL RIVER, DEL. 

The original project adopted by the river and harbor act of March 
3, 1873, was for a channel 6 feet deep at mean low water, of various 
widths, between Milton, the head of navigation, and the mouth, and 
the dredging to the same depth of a channel across the beach to form 
a new entrance into the river from Delaware Bay, at an estimated 
cost of $80,447.. This project was modified in 1881 by the addition 
of jetty construction to protect the proposed new entrance. It was 
again modified in 1885 to provide for a channel 6 feet deep at mean 
low water and 40 feet wide from the mouth to Milton, cutting off 
some sharp points. This project was completed in 1890 so far as 
the dredging from Milton to the mouth Avas concerned, but the new 
entrance was not made. The amount expended on this project in the 
dredging operations was $35,000. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE BALTIMORE 
(MD.) DISTRICT. 



1. PATAPSCO RIVER AND CHANNEL TO BALTIMORE, MD. 

Date of original project, July 4, 1836. No dimensions were given; 
the law simply read " for deepening the harbor of Baltimore." 

Modifications.— August 30, 1852. The Fort McHenry Channel 
from the limits of the city of Baltimore to a point just below Fort 
Carroll and the Brewerton Channel from this point to deep water 
in Chesapeake Bay were dredged 150 feet wide by 22 feet deep. 
Estimated cost unknown. 

June 10, 1872. The project was enlarged to provide a width of 
400 feet at the lower end of the channel, diminished to 250 feet at 
the upper end, with a depth of 24 feet. Estimated cost unknown. 

March 3, 1881. After the completion of the project of 1872 it was 
found that the portion of the Brewerton Channel which was exposed 



1788 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS. U. S. ARMY. 

to the material brought into the bay by the Susquehanna River was 
continually obstructed by a sedimentary deposit. This led to a 
search for a better location for a deep channel which could be more 
easily maintained by dredging and the natural currents, and it was 
found on the line of the resultant of the two great forces made by 
the currents of the upper bay and Patapsco River. This new loca- 
tion had also the advantage of being shorter, and for this reason, the 
very much diminished sedimentaiy deposit and the consequent lessen- 
ing of the cost of maintenance, it was adopted and the channel 
deepened to 27 feet at mean low water and widened to GOO feet in 
the straight sections and over 1,200 feet in the angles. At the same 
time the portion of the Brewerton Channel between the upper end 
of the present cut-off and the point of intersection of the Brewerton 
and Craighill Channels was abandoned. The estimated cost of this 
project was $1,250,000. 

June 3, 1896. For dredging a channel 30 feet deep, GOO feet wide 
at bottom, and over 1,200 feet in the bends, with side slopes of 3 base 
to 1 vertical, at an estimated cost of $2,500,000. 

2. CHANNEL TO CURTIS BAY, IN PATAPSCO RIVER, BALTIMORE 
HARBOR, MP. 

Date of original project, July 15, 1892. It was for a channel 27 
feet deep at mean low water and a bottom width of 150 feet from the 
Baltimore ship channel to the old sugar refinery wharf in South 
Baltimore Harbor. The channel was made 27 feet deep and 70 feet 
wide in the axis of the 150-foot channel with an appropriation of 
$40,000 of the $85,000 estimated cost. This project was never com- 
pleted. 

4. ELK AND LITTLE ELK RIVERS, MD. 

Date of original project, June 23, 1874. It was for a channel G 
feet deep at mean low water or 8 feet at high water, from Cedar Point 
to Elkton, the head of navigation, and in the Little Elk as far as 
Bennetts Wharf. The estimated cost was $36,000 if 75 feet wide and 
about $25,000 if 50 feet wide, cheap dikes being required for regu- 
lating the banks and to provide a place behind which to deposit the 
material dredged from the shoals. 

Modifications.- — September 19, 1890. For dredging a channel 100 
feet wide and 8 feet deep from deep water below Cedar Point to 
the bridge at Elkton. Estimated cost, $24,000. 

June 13, 1902. For restoration of the project to the above dimen- 
sions at an estimated cost of $1G,665 and $2,500 annually for mainte- 
nance. 

March 2, 1907. For dredging a channel 6 feet deep and 100 feet 
wide from Elkton to Cedar Point at an estimated cost of $16,802.77. 
The act appropriated $18,803 for completion and maintenance. 

5. SUSQUEHANNA RIVER ABOVE AND BELOW HAVRE DE GRACE, MO. 

Date of original project, August 30, 1852. It was for a channel 12 
feet deep and 100 feet wide from the mouth of the river to Havre de 
Grace, a distance of about 5 miles. The estimated cost was $59,000. 



APPENDIX. 1789 

6. HARBORS AT ROCKHALL, QUENSTOWN, CLAIBORNE, AND CAM- 
BRIDGE, AND CHESTER. CHOPTANK, WARWICK, WICOMICO, POCO- 
MOKE, LA TRAPPE, AND MANOKIN RIVERS, AND TYASKIN CREEK, 
MD. 

(a) ROCKHALL HARBOR, MD. 

Date of original project, June 3, 1896. It was for a channel 80 
feet wide and 10 feet deep at mean low water from the 10-foot curve 
in Swan Creek Inlet to the 10-foot depth in Chesapeake Bay and 
100 feet wide and 10 feet deep from that depth in Swan Creek Inlet 
to the old pier at Rockhall. with a turning basin embracing the old 
and new piers. The estimated cost was $10,600. 

(b) QUEEXSTOWN HARBOR, MD. 

Date of original project. March 3, 1871. It was for a channel 100 
feet wide and 8 feet deep. The estimated cost was $9,500. 

(d) CAMBRIDGE HARBOR, MD. 

Date of original project. March 3, 1871. It was for an entrance 
way of 100 feet in width and of sufficient harbor accommodations of 
a depth of 10 feet at mean low water. The estimated cost was 
$36,000. This was extended by the act of July 13, 1892, for a channel 
150 feet wide and 12 feet deep from that depth in Choptank River 
to the railroad wharf, a distance of nearly a mile. Estimated cost, 
$50,237. 

(g) WARWICK RIVER, MD. 

Date of original project, June 14, 1880. It was for a channel 7 
feet deep and 75 feet wide from the mouth to the head of navigation, 
at Secretary Landing, about 1 mile. Estimated cost, $3,500. 

(h) WICOMICO RIVER, MD. 

Date of original project, June 10, 1872. It was for a channel 75 
feet wide by 7 feet deep from the 7- foot contour below to the bridge 
at Salisbui^, a distance of about 2 miles, with construction of dikes 
by private parties for retention of dredged material. Estimated 
cost, about $20,000. 

(i) POCOMOKE RIVER, MD. 

Date of original project, June 18, 1878. For removing obstruc- 
tions and dredging a channel 7 feet deep and of varying widths 
between Snow Hill and Shad Landing, about 4^ miles. Estimated 
cost. $10,000. 

Mod if cation. — Act of August 5, 1886. For a cut-off below Snow 
Hill 80 feet wide by 7 feet deep, 1.100 feet long, through the low neck 
of land forming four abrupt bends. Estimated cost, $8,000. 

(l) TYASKIN CREEK, MD. 

Date of original project. June 13, 1902. It was for a channel 120 
feet wide and 9 feet deep from the 9-foot contour in Nanticoke 
Eiver to the wharf at Tyaskin, a distance of about 3,500 feet. Esti- 
mated cost, $13,200. 



1790 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

7. CORSICA RIVER, MD. 

Date of original project, August 2, 1882. It was for a channel 
about li miles long, 100 feet wide, and 8 feet deep from the mouth 
to the wharf at Center ville, and a turning basin of the same depth 
200 feet wide by 300 feet at the upper end. Estimated cost, $30,000. 

10. TRED AVON RIVER, MD. 

Date of original project, June 14, 1880. For a channel 8 feet deep 
and 150 feet wide from Peach Blossom Creek to Easton Point (a 
distance of 3 miles), with a turning basin at the latter point. Esti- 
mated cost, $8,250. 

12. NANTICOKE RIVER, DEL. AND MD., AND NORTHWEST FORK OF 
NANTICOKE RIVER, MD. 

Nanticoke River. — Date of original project, August 18, 1894. The 
item was for "Improving Broad Creek River, Del., continuing im- 
provement, $5,000, of which so much as may be necessary shall be 
used for removal of bar that extends from the railroad bridge at 
Seaford toward the mouth of Nanticoke River." With this appro- 
priation the channel was dredged where necessary to a width of 100 
feet and a depth of 9 feet from the south side of the railroad bridge 
at Seaford to a point 8,000 feet below. A previous appropriation 
($10,000) for Nanticoke River, made August 5, 1886, was. in accord- 
ance with the terms of the law, applied to Broad Creek River up to 
Laurel, Del. 

Northwest Fork of Nanticoke River. — The original project is the 
present one. 

13. BROAD CREEK RIVER, DEL. 

Date of original project, June 14, 1880. For a channel 7 feet deep 
and 60 feet wide from the mouth to Laurel, Del., a distance of about 
7 miles. Estimated cost, $46,500. 

Modification. — Act of July 13, 1892. For a channel 70 feet wide 
and 8 feet deep between Bethel and Laurel, a distance of about 3 
miles. Estimated cost, $15,000. 

15. CRISFIELD HARBOR, MD. 

Date of original project, March 3, 1875. For a channel 266 feet 
wide and 12 feet deep from above the railroad wharf to a point 
known as the Ci second angle " opposite Somers Cove Light, and 
from that point to deep water below, a channel of the same depth 
425 feet wide, and, in addition, a basin on both the north and south 
sides of the railroad wharf 12 feet deep. Estimated cost, $37,317.50. 

16. LOWER THOROUGHFARE, AT OR NEAR WENONA, DEAL 
ISLAND, MD. 

Date of original project, March 3, 1881. For a channel 7 feet deep 
and 100 feet wide from Tangier Sound to the wharves of Daniel & 
Vetra & Son at Wenona, with a turning basin at the upper end, at 
an estimated cost of $10,000. 



APPENDIX. 1791 

HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE WASHINGTON, 
D. C, DISTRICT. 



1. POTOMAC RIVER AT WASHINGTON, D. C. 

In 1785 the " Patowmack Company " was organized under the 
direction of George Washington, by authority of the States of Vir- 
ginia and Maryland, for the purpose of making the Potomac navi- 
gable from Georgetown to Cumberland, Md., from which point it was 
expected that a good road would lead to the Ohio Biver. To this end 
it did some open-channel work and built five short lengths of canal 
to surmount the chief obstacles which were found at Little Falls, 
Great Falls, Seneca Falls, Shenandoah Falls, and House Falls, the 
latter being about 5 miles above Harpers Ferry. Navigation was 
opened in 1802, but the facilities afforded were not satisfactory. 
After an existence of about 35 years and an expenditure of $700,000, 
the " Patowmack Company " became bankrupt. Agitation for a con- 
tinuous canal was then begun, and such work was authorized by 
Virginia and Maryland in 1824 and by the United States in 1825. 
The United States engineers, under the immediate direction of Gen. 
S. Bernard, made a report, published in 1826, proposing the Chesa- 
peake & Ohio Canal from Georgetown to Pittsburgh and the Ohio 
& Erie Canal from Pittsburgh to Lake Erie. The eastern section of 
the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal was estimated to cost $8,177,081.05, 
but the friends of the project declared this estimate excessive, and 
had another one made, amounting to $4,179,346.93. Funds were sub- 
scribed and this section was begun by the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal 
Co. in 1828 and was finally completed to Cumberland in 1850, at a 
cost of $11,290,327. The United States contributed $999,990 to the 
work. 

The earliest improvement of the Potomac River at Washington, 
D. C, appears to have been undertaken by citizens of Georgetown. 
In 1804 they presented a petition to Congress stating that the channel 
was obstructed by a mud bank recently formed below Masons (Ana- 
lostan) Island, and asking that Congress give permission for the 
erection of a dam to the Virginia shore, with the hope of improving 
navigation. This was authorized by Congress in an act approved 
January 19, 1805, and a short time afterwards the dam was built, but 
it did not have the desired effect. Later the corporation of George- 
town used a " mud machine " to cut a channel. 

By an act approved March 2, 1833, Congress appropriated $150,000 
" to aid the citizens of Georgetown in removing the obstructions to 
their navigation by causing the cut already made through the bar 
below the town to be enlarged and deepened, and for the further pur- 
pose of enabling them to make a free turnpike road on the Virginia 
side of the river, and to purchase and make free forever the bridge 
over Little Falls." The books of the corporation of Georgetown 
show that of this amount the sum of $5,000 was expended in deepen- 
ing water on the bar below Long Bridge and $43,266.60 in dredging 
the cut above the bridge, making a total of $48,266.60 expended for 
the improvement of the river. 



1792 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

In 1849 $1,500 was appropriated for a survey of the river, and the 
sum of $1,208.61 was expended for this purpose and the balance cov- 
ered into the surplus fund of the Treasury. 

During the summer of 1869 the corporate authorities of George- 
town, at their own expense, caused the bar in the Georgetown or 
Virginia channel to be dredged out to a depth of 13 feet at low tide 
and a width of 80 feet, at a cost of about $10,000. 

The first appropriation made by the National Government to be 
devoted wholly to the improvement of the river was an item <>f 
$50,000 in the river and harbor act of July 11, 1870. From this 
time to March 3, 1881, a total amount of $290,000 was appropriated 
by Congress for the improvement of the harbors of Washington and 
Georgetown. This sum appears to have been expended for dredging 
channels at first 14 feet and later 16 feet in depth in the Virginia 
channel and 12 and 15 feet deep in the Washington channel, and 
for the removal to a depth of 20 feet of the most dangerous rocks 
obstructing navigation in the harbor of Georgetown. 

For more complete details of work under previous projects see 
Annual Report of 1883, pages 763 to 768. For map of location see 
Annual Report of 1877, page 356. 

2. ANACOSTIA RIVER, D. C. 

The act of September 19, 1890, provided that $20,000 of the ap- 
propriation for improving the Potomac River should be available 
for expenditure on the channel in the Anacostia River between the 
navy yard and Giesboro Point. Under this authority 90,217 cubic 
yards of mud were removed, to form a channel about 200 feet wide 
and 20 feet deep, and deposited on the adjacent flats at a cost of 
$18,536.94. (See Annual Report for 1892, p. 1035.) 

A joint resolution of April 11, 1898. appropriated $2,000 for an 
examination and survey of the Anacostia River, and this sum was 
expended for that purpose. The report of the survey was printed in 
House Document No. 87, Fifty-fifth Congress, third session, with 
maps, and in Annual Report of 1899, page 1443, without maps. It 
provided for a development of the entire river within the limits 
of the District of Columbia. 

7. (c) O.CCOQUAN CREEK, VA. 

The first project for the improvement, adopted by river and harbor 
act of March 3, 1873, was in accordance with the plan printed in 
Senate Document No. 25, Forty-second Congress, third session, and 
had for its object the dredging of channels 100 feet wide and ."» feet 
deep through Sand, Upper Mud, and Lower Mud Bars, at an esti- 
mated cost of $18,000. In 1879 a dike at Sand Bar was added to 
the project, increasing the estimated cost to $25,000. Appropria- 
tions made from 1873 to 1879 amounted to $25,000, sufficient to com- 
plete the project as above outlined. Channels of full projected di- 
mensions were dredged through all three bars, and 876 linear feet of 
timber dikes were built at Sand Bar to secure permanency of the 
channel at that location. The amount of dredging was about 1- 1.173 
cubic yards. The expenditures on this project were $25,000. 



APPENDIX. 1793 

The act of August 11, 1888, authorized a preliminary examination 
and survey, which was made during the year 1889. The plan of 
improvement proposed was for dredging channels through Occo- 
quan, Sand, and Upper Mud Bars 100 feet wide and 8 feet deep, and 
through Lower Mud Bar 150 feet wide and 8 feet deep, and for 
building brush and pile mattress dikes at each of these bars, all at 
an estimated cost of $91,249.92. This 8-foot project was never 
adopted. 

7. (d) AQUIA CREEK, VA. 

The first project for improvement, adopted by river and harbor 
act of June 10, 1872, was in accordance with plans printed in Senate 
Executive Document No. 35, Fortieth Congress, second session, and 
the Annual Eeport of the Chief of Engineers for 1872, pages 708 
to 710, neither of which contain maps, and provided for dredging 
a channel 40 feet wide and 6 feet deep from the Narrows to the 
natural 6-foot depth, about 2^ miles therebelow, at an estimated cost 
of $18,000. Congress made four appropriations, amounting to 
$10,500, the last being made on June 18, 1878, for completing the 
improvement. Accordingly, this project was completed with the 
expenditure of the $10,500 on December 25, 1878. The resulting 
dredged channel was about If miles long, 40 to 50 feet wide, and 4J 
to 6 feet deep, and the amount of material excavated was about 
67,576 cubic yards. 

iSTo further work was done until the second project was adopted 
by river and harbor act approved September 19, 1890. This project, 
based on plans printed in House Document No. 135, Fifty-first Con- 
gress, first session, with map, and in the Annual Report Chief 
of Engineers for 1890, pages 1096 to 1103, no map, provided for 
dredging a channel 150 feet wide and 8 feet deep from the mouth 
to the Narrows, for dredging a channel 80 feet wide and 8 feet deep 
off the mouth of Austin Run, and for the construction of a brush 
or timber dike at Austin Run, at the estimated cost of $101,278. This 
project as modified by the Secretary of War on December 4, 1890, 
provided for dredging a channel 80 feet wide and 6 feet deep from 
the mouth to the Narrows, work above the Narrows being omitted, 
at the estimated cost of $40,000, which was later reduced to $21,000. 
Between 1890 and 1896 Congress made four appropriations, amount- 
ing to $21,000, of which $463.36 was transferred to consolidated ap- 
propriation under the provisions of the river and harbor act of 
June 13, 1902. Accordingly, this project was completed on December 
4, 1897, by the expenditure of $20,536.64, which resulted in dredging 
through all shoals having less than 6 feet depth between the mouth 
and the Narrows, in making a channel about 3^ miles long, 80 feet 
wide, and 6 feet deep, and in the excavation of 128,295 cubic yards of 
earth. The total expenditures under the two previous projects 
amounted to $31,036.64. 

8. RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER, VA. 

The act of August 30, 1852, appropriated $3,000 for a survey of the 
Rappahannock River. A partial report thereof, b}^ Capt. Mansfield, 
dated November 26, 1852, is printed in Executive Document No. 60 C/ 
8373°— eng 1915 113 



1794 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, TJ. S. ARMY. 

Forty- first Congress, third session, without maps. The survey was 
made by the United States Coast Survey at Capt. Mansfield's re- 
quest in 1853-54. The amount appropriated was apparently ex- 
pended. 

The first project for the improvement of the Rappahannock River 
was adopted by the act of March 3, 1871, and is contained in House 
Document No. 60, Forty-first Congress, third session, with map. It 
provides for a channel 10 feet deep at low water and 100 feet wide, 
to be obtained by dredging the shoals and by blasting out the wrecks, 
and also for a few dikes and inexpensive jetties. The estimated cost 
of this project was $81,360. 

The project was modified in 1879, as set forth in the Annual Re- 
port for 1879, pages 612-614, no map, so as to provide for a channel 
10 feet deep and 100 feet wide between Fredericksburg and Port 
Royal and 15 feet deep and 200 feet wide below Port Royal. This 
channel was to be secured by dredging and maintained by wing dams 
and training dikes. The estimated cost of the modification was 
$290,345, in addition to the amount already spent. 

The expenditures on these projects were $310,645.83. As a result 
of this expenditure channels were dredged through seven bais in the 
13-mile reach of river below Fredericksburg, and timber dikes were 
built at some of them; about 510,128 cubic Awards of material was 
dredged; 1,537 cubic yards of rock was excavated; 2,618 linear feet 
of dike repaired; 13,399 linear feet of dike built; and various miscel- 
laneous work done. The project was in force until the present project 
was adopted in 1905. 

9. TJRBANA CREEK, VA. 

The original project for this improvement adopted by river and 
harbor act of March 3, 1879, based upon examination and survey, as 
printed in Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1875, volume 
2, page 139, which does not contain map, had for its object the ex- 
cavation of a channel 150 feet wide and 10 feet deep through the 
outer bar at the estimated cost of $22,100, which was subsequently re- 
duced to $20,000. It was modified in 1883 on recommendation of the 
Chief of Engineers and approval of the Secretary of War to include 
dredging through the inner bar and a turning basin at Palmers 
Wharf at the same estimated cost— $20,000. "To June 30, 1884, 
$15,500 had been appropriated and expended. This expenditure re- 
sulted in a total dredging of 58,729 cubic yards in dredging the 
channels through the outer bar 1,200 feet long. 120 feet wide, and 10 
feet deep, through the inner bar 1,090 feet long, 80 feet wide, and 10 
feet deep, and a turning basin at Palmers Wharf 300 feet long, 20C 
feet wide, and 10 feet deep. 

No further appropriation was made until August 11, 1888, when 
$3,000 was appropriated. On December 18, 1888, the project was ex- 
tended upon recommendation of the Chief of Engineers and approval 
of the Secretary of War (Annual Report for 1889, p. 1010. which has 
a map) to protect the channel through the outer bar by a series of 
brush and oyster-shell dikes and brush mattresses, at an estimated 
cost of $37,580. Under this project $12,000 was expended. This ex- 
penditure resulted in a total dredging of 4<'>. < .>:>: , ) cubic yards and the 
construction of 452 linear feet of brush and oyster-shell dikes. The 



APPENDIX. 1795 

dredging was done at Bailey Point and at the entrance to the creek, 
either in restoring depths or dredging and widening the cut at Bailey 
Point, to make more easy navigation. Three brush and oyster-shell 
dikes were built at Bailey Point, but by experience it was shown 
that these brush and oyster-shell dikes were not sufficiently sub- 
stantial to withstand wave action during high winds, and accord- 
ingly the project was modified in June, 1897, to form the present 
project. 

HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE NORFOLK, VA., 
DISTRICT. 



1. HARBOR AT NORFOLK AND CHANNELS TO NEWPORT NEWS, VA. 

Norfolk Harbor. — The original project for Norfolk Harbor was 
adopted in 1876 (river and harbor act of Aug. 14, 1876). This proj- 
ect provides for securing by dredging a channel 10 miles long, 500 
feet wide, and 25 feet deep at ordinary low water from deep water 
in Hampton Eoads to Norfolk Harbor, the improvement of the inner 
harbor by dredging through the bar of the Eastern Branch of the 
Elizabeth Biver, the deepening and widening of the channel at the 
mouth of the Southern Branch, and the provision of additional 
anchorage in front of Berkley and Portsmouth at an estimated cost 
of $378,000. Under it, up to June 30, 1885, a total of $383,032.81 
had been expended, which resulted in a channel at least 25 feet deep 
at mean low water and not less than 200 feet wide from the deep 
water of Hampton Eoads to the United States navy yard, a distance 
of 10 miles, and also a channel at least 22 feet deep at mean low 
water and not less than 200 feet wide in the Eastern Branch up to 
the Norfolk & Western Eailroad bridge, a distance of 1 mile. A 
total of 2,635,648 cubic yards of material had been removed. 

The project was revised in 1885 so as to provide by dredging a 
channel 25 feet deep at mean low water and 500 feet wide from 
deep water in Hampton Eoads to Norfolk and the United States 
navy yard, a distance of 10 miles, and also to secure a channel in the 
Eastern Branch not less than 22 feet at mean low water, with a width 
of at least 300 feet to the Norfolk & Western Eailroad bridge, a 
distance of 1 mile, and gradually increasing in width to 700 feet at 
the mouth. It was subsequently modified (Annual Eeport for 1886, 
Pt. 1, p. 148) so as to provide for excavating the 25-foot channel to 
within 75 feet of the pierhead lines on both sides of the river, the 
extension of the improvement with a depth of 22 feet at mean low 
water on the Eastern Branch to the Campostella Bridge, a distance 
of one-half mile, and the construction of a bulkhead on the Berkley 
Flats. The estimated cost of this work was $507,744. 

The river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, provided for 
" improving the approach to the inner harbor and the United States 
navy yard at Norfolk by increasing anchorage between Lambert 
Point and Fort Norfolk," at an estimated cost of $150,000 (Annual 
Eeport for 1891, p. 1295), making the total cost of all improvements 
thus far authorized $1,041,774.56. 



1796 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

The execution of the project of 1885, modified in 188G and 1890, 
up to June 30, 1898, had resulted in a channel with a depth of 25 feet 
at mean low water from Hampton Roads to the United States navy- 
yard on the Southern Branch, a distance of 10 miles, and 500 feet 
wide, except between Fort Norfolk and Lambert Point, where the 
25-foot channel was somewhat contracted, a channel 500 to 1,050 
feet wide and 22 feet deep at mean low water in the Eastern Branch 
to the Norfolk & Western Railroad bridge, and an anchorage area 
of 75^ acres with a depth of 25 feet at mean low water. The total 
expenditure to June 30, 1898, was $1,122,500 (Annual Report for 
1899, p. 224). A total of 8,883,747 cubic yards of material had been 
removed under all projects. 

The deficiency act of July 7, 1898, provided for securing a channel 
450 feet wide and 28 feet deep at mean low water from Hampton 
Roads to the navy yard at Norfolk, at an estimated cost of $3(50,000 
(H. Doc. No. 531, 54th Cong., 1st sess.). This work was completed 
December 23, 1898, at a cost of $359,516.42. A total of 2,361,775 
cubic yards of material, scow measurement, was removed. 

The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, provided for cutting 
away of 400 feet of Hospital Point to the depth of 25 feet at mean low 
water (Annual Report for 1897, Pt. 2, p. 1355), the dredging to a 
depth of 25 feet at mean low water on either side parallel to the 
established pierhead line to within 75 feet of it as far as the Sea- 
board Air Line Railway Wharf on the south and the Atlantic Coast 
Line Wharf on the north, and the rebuilding of Hospital Point 
Wharf and sea wall, which were demolished incident to the improve- 
ment. The estimated cost was $193,957. This work was completed 
March 9, 1906, at a cost of $186,147.66. The total material removed 
was 1,565,917 cubic yards. 

Under the river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, the removal 
of Pinners Point to a depth of 28 feet at mean low water at an 
estimated cost of $20,000 was authorized. The work was completed 
October 18, 1905, at a' cost of $13,864.40. The total material removed 
was 167,041 cubic yards. 

On June 30, 1907, all work included in all preceding projects, 
estimated to cost $1,812,747.98, had been completed, excepting a 
part of the dredging in the Berkley Flats and in the Eastern Branch 
between the Norfolk & Western Railway bridge and the Campostella 
Bridge, at a total cost of $1,815,931.15, of which $51,052.16 was for 
maintenance. The total material removed under all projects was 
14,687,115 cubic yards. 

The river and harbor act of March 2, 1907, provided (H. Docs. Nos. 
373 and 381, 59th Cong., 1st sess.) for deepening the existing channel 
to 30 feet at mean low water with a width of 600 feet from Hampton 
Roads to Lambert Point, and a width of 800 feet from Lambert Point 
to the junction of the Eastern and Southern branches of the river. 
The project also included the removal of shoals at the mouth of the 
Eastern Branch to a width of 500 feet and a depth of 25 feet at mean 
low water. The estimated cost of executing the project was $1,132,000. 
It was completed March 21, 1911, at a total cost of $682,297.10. The 
total material removed was 8.241.895 cubic yards scow measurement 
(Annual Report for 1911, p. 333)'. 

On June 30, 1911, the year in which work started under the 
present project, all work under previous projects, the estimated cost 



APPENDIX. 1797 

of which was $2,949,747.98, had been completed at a total cost of 
$2,554,782.56, of which $62,840.50 was for maintenance. The total 
material removed under all preceding projects was 23,240,105 cubic 
yards scow measurement. The main channel of the harbor was 
available at mean low water for ships of 30 feet draft as far as the 
navy yard, which is 10 miles from deep water in Hampton Roads. 
The Eastern Branch channel was available at mean low water for 
vessels of 22 feet draft as far as the Campostella Bridge, which is 
11 miles from deep water in Hampton Roads. 

Western Branch of Elisabeth River. — The original project for this 
improvement, adopted by river and harbor act of June 3, 1896 (H. 
Doc. No. 331, 54th Cong., 1st sess.), provided for obtaining, by dredg- 
ing, a channel 200 feet wide and 20 feet deep at mean low water for 
a distance of about 1 mile from deep water in Norfolk Harbor, at an 
estimated cost of $45,000. The work was completed August 25, 
1897, at a cost of $44,418.73. The total material removed was 
482,033 cubic yards. (Annual Report for 1899, p. 225.) 

The channel to Newport News. — The original project for this im- 
provement, adopted by river and harbor act of June 13, 1902 (H. Doc. 
No. 93, 56th Cong., 1st sess.), provided for the dredging of a channel 
2^ miles long, 500 feet wide, and 30 feet deep at mean low water 
south of the Middle Ground Light in Hampton Roads, Va., through 
the shoal known as " Middle Ground Bar," at an estimated cost of 
$225,000. The work under this project was completed February 3, 
1905, at the estimated cost, with an additional expenditure of $12,500 
for maintenance. The total material removed was 1,443,237 cubic 
yards, scow measurement. (Annual Report for 1905, p. 1189.) 

2. NANSEMOND RIVER, VA. 

A survey of this stream was directed by the river and harbor act 
of March 3, 1871. (Ex. Doc. No. 23, Senate, 42d Cong., 2d sess., and 
Annual Report for 1872, p. 723.) An estimate of $30,000 was made, 
based thereon, for procuring a channel 100 feet wide and 8 feet deep 
at mean low water, by dredging, regularization, and by the removal 
of wrecks, piles, fallen trees, snags, etc. This project was adopted 
by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1873, which appropriated 
$15,000 for the work. Additional appropriations aggregating $22,-- 
000, were made between 1874 and 1878, the estimate for completion 
having been increased to $37,000 in 1878, on account of the long 
period over which the work had extended, repairs, and the difficulty 
of finding dumping grounds. The project was completed November 
3, 1877, excepting certain repairs to dikes, which it was deemed best 
to temporarily delay. The total expenditure to June 30, 1878, was 
$34,899.27, resulting in the removal of 29,159 cubic yards of material 
and the construction of 3,489 feet of dike. 

3. JAMES RIVER, VA. 

On the basis of a survey made by the United States in 1836, at a 
cost of $500, the United States expended, between 1852 and 1854, 
$22,500 in removing dangerous rocks and dredging in the channel 
of James River immediately below Richmond. The municipality of 
Richmond also expended at this time for the same purpose $21,300. 



1798 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

The general improvement of the river by the United States was 
begun in 1871. At this time its channel was obstructed not only by 
shoals and rocky reefs but also by sunken vessels and obstacles to 
navigation placed by military authority during the Civil War, prin- 
cipally in the 10-mile reach below Richmond. 

The original project adopted by the river and harbor act of July 
11, 1870, provided for excavating a channel between the mouth of 
the river and Richmond, including a canal at Dutch Gap, 180 feet 
wide by 18 feet deep at high water, equivalent to depths of 14.5 to 
16.15 feet at low water, depending on the tidal range in different 
parts of the river. Operations under this project were proceeded 
with until 1884, the year of the adoption of the present project, prin- 
cipally in the 14-mile reach below Richmond. The work done con- 
sisted in removing sunken vessels and military obstructions, blasting 
and excavating rocky reefs, dredging, and constructing regulation 
works. It also included opening and enlarging the canal at Dutch 
Gap, which work had been begun but abandoned before completion 
during the Civil War. A small amount of dredging was done at Har- 
risons Bar and Goose Hill Flats, where narrow channels were formed 
with a depth of about 18 feet where the usable depths had previously 
been 15 feet. The result of work under this project was a channel 
with a usable depth of 12| feet at low water and widths of 100 feet 
and upward. By the opening of Dutch Gap Canal to navigation 5 
miles of channel were cut off, in which Trents Reach Shoal, with a 
depth of 8 feet at low water, was situated. 

4. PAGAN RIVER, VA. 

The river and harbor act of June 23, 1874, provided for a survey 
of this river. A report and estimate based upon this survey (Annual 
Report for 1875, Pt. 2, p. 146), provided for dredging a channel 8 feet 
deep at mean low water and 60 feet wide through four bars below 
Smithfielcl, at an estimated cost of $28,380. 

The river and harbor acts of June 14, 1880, and March 3, 1881, 
appropriated $10,000 for this work. The money so appropriated was 
all expended by February 9, 1882. A total of 41,290 cubic yards of 
material were removed and a channel 8 feet dee]) at mean low water 
and not less than 60 feet wide was obtained. 

A project for securing a channel 80 feet wide and 8 feet deep at 
mean low water was adopted bv the river and harbor act of June 13, 
1902, at an estimated cost of $2*8,870 (H. Doc. No. 88, 50th Cong., 2d 
sess., and Annual Report for 1901, p. 1474.) No work of construc- 
tion was done under this project. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, contained the follow- 
ing provision relative to the Pagan River : 

The Secretary of War may, in his discretion, expend the balance remaining to 
the credit of the said improvement with a view to securing a channel width of 

not less than 40 feet and such depth as may be obtained without exceeding said 
balance. 

The project as modified was completed June 30, 1906, at a cost of 
$10,671.01, and a navigable channel 40 feet wide and 10 feet deep 
at mean low water had been seemed from Smithfield to the mouth 
of the river, a distance of 5 miles. The material removed amounted 
to 81,672 cubic yards, scow measurement. 



APPENDIX. 1799 

No work, either of maintenance or construction, was done on this 
stream between June 30, 1906, and June 30, 1910, the latter year 
being the date of the adoption of the present project. 

5. APPOMATTOX RIVER, VA. 

The original project for improving Appomattox River, Va., 
adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1871, provided for 
dredging a channel 60 feet wide by 12 feet deep at ordinary high 
water, below Petersburg, Va., including the enlarging of a cut-off 
about 2 miles long, called Puddle Dock-cut, which had been begun 
by the city of Petersburg. The estimated cost was $367,600, with 
$10,000 annually for repairs to the banks and channel. The above 
project also provided for necessary regularization of the channel. 
By 1875 a channel with the dimensions of the project of 1871 had 
been obtained, and considerable progress made in constructing semi- 
permanent works of regulation and protection, comprising princi- 
pally light pile and brush jetties and sheet piling training dikes. 
The project was modified in 1893 (Annual Report for 1893, p. 1336), 
in which provision was made for an expenditure of $48,090, with 
$20,000 for maintenance and repairs for two years. The total ex- 
penditure on the above projects, prior to the commencement of work 
under the adopted project, was $530,516.04, of which $471,020 was for 
original work and $58,596.04 for maintenance. 

7. ONANCOCK RIVER, VA. 

The original project (river and harbor act of Mar. 3, 1879, An- 
nual Report for 1879, p. 716) provided for dredging a channel 
through the bar at the harbor mouth, and near the wharves 300 feet 
wide across the bar and 100 feet wide in the approach to the wharves 
at Onancock, and 8 feet deep at mean low water, at an estimated cost 
of $10,000. A total of $8,000 was appropriated for this work (river 
and harbor acts of Mar. 3, 1879, and June 14, 1880). Its expenditure 
resulted in a dredged channel 100 feet wide, and with depths at 
mean low water of 8 feet across the bar and 7 feet near and above 
Wise Point and near the wharves at Onancock. A total of 31,864 
cubic yards of material was removed. 

A resurvey of the harbor was directed by the river and harbor act 
of August 11, 1888 (Annual Report for 1890, pp. 968-971). The 
plan of improvement recommended therein is for a channel 300 feet 
wide at the outer bar, and 200 feet wide at the inner or middle 
ground, both to have depths of 8 feet at mean low water at an esti- 
mated cost of $12,511. This project was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of September 19, 1890, which appropriated $6,000 for 
the work. With this appropriation 26,778 cubic yards of material 
were removed, resulting in channels of the project depth, 1,100 feet 
of it being 150 feet wide and 500 feet 100 feet wide, at a cost of 
$5,931.40. 

The river and harbor act of July 13, 1892, appropriated $6,511 to 
complete the project. 

• With this appropriation, and the balance remaining, 41,154 cubic 
yards of material were removed under contract, completing the 
project to the full dimensions on October 20, 1893, at a cost of 
$6,579.60. 



1800 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

The total expenditure under all previous projects was $20,511, 
which had resulted in a channel 100 feet wide and 7 feet deep at 
mean low water through the mud flats at Onancock, and channels 8 
feet deep at mean low water and 300 and 200 feet wide through the 
outer and inner bars. The total material removed was 99,796 cubic 
yards. 

9. INLAND WATER ROUTE FROM NORFOLK HARBOR, VA., TO ALBE- 
MARLE SOUND, N. C, THROUGH CURRITUCK SOUND. 

The projects connected with this improvement have always had 
for their object the improvement of the natural waterways which 
the two land cuts of the privately-owned Albemarle & Chesapeake 
Canal united to form a continuous water route from Norfolk, Ya.. to 
Albemarle Sound, N. C. 

Before the consolidation of the improvement of the Southern 
Branch of the Elizabeth River, Va., North Landing River, Va. and 
N. C, Currituck Sound, N. C., Coinjock Bay, N. C, North River, and 
North River Bar under one project, known as the Inland water route 
from Norfolk Harbor, Va., to Albemarle Sound, N. C ., through Cur- 
rituck Sound, by the river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, these 
streams were improved under three separate projects, of which the 
following is a summary : 

Southern Branch of the Elizabeth River, Va. — The original proj- 
ect for this stream was adopted by the river and harbor act of March 
3, 1873, and provided for a channel 7 feet deep at mean low water 
and 60 feet wide from Deep Creek to the Albemarle & Chesapeake 
Canal lock, bv dredging at bars, shoals, and abrupt bends, at an esti- 
mated cost of $25,000 (Annual Report for 1872, p. 715). The esti- 
mate was subsequently increased to $10,000 on account of additions 
to the project. 

Between 1873 and 1879 dredging was carried oji under various 
contracts for a distance of about 1 mile below the Albemarle & Ches- 
apeake Canal lock, at Parks Gap, Nicaragua Bar, Deep Creek Bar, 
and at other lesser shoals. 

In 1879 the improvement was reported completed, a channel not 
less than 7 feet deep at mean low water and about 60 feet wide hav- 
ing been secured from the canal lock to Deep Creek. 

North Landing River, Va. and N. G. — The original project for the 
improvement of North Landing River, Va. and N. C., was adopted 
by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1879, and provided for the 
improvement of the river throughout its entire length of 17 miles, 
by dredging and snagging, so as to secure a channel 80 feet wide on 
the bottom and 9 feet deep at an ordinary stage of water, at an esti- 
mated cost of $88,000. (H. Doc. No. 68, 49th Cong., 3d sess., and 
Annual Report for 1879, p. 683.) 

Dredging by contract was carried on between 1880 and 1882. in 
accordance with the approved project, by dredging a channel in the 
shoal parts of the river at Gordon's Wood Yard Reach, Devils Half 
Acre, Blackwater Flats, Stump Tree Reach, and Beacons 2 and 4. 
Points were cut off at sharp bends at Cypress Point and the lower end 
of Double S Bend. Logs and snags were removed and overhanging 
trees cut over the entire length of the river. 



APPENDIX. 1801 

A total of $49,777.34 had been expended up to June 30, 1884, when 
the project was reported completed. The remaining funds were 
applied to maintenance work from time to time up to June 30, 1897, 
when the expenditures for all purposes amounted to $57,669.69. 

Currituck Sound, Coinjock Bay, North River, and North River 
Bar, N. C. — A project adopted by the river and harbor act of June 18, 
1878, provided for a channel 9 feet deep at ordinary winter stages 
and 80 feet wide in Currituck Sound and through North River Bar, 
N. C, at an estimated cost of $90,000. 

The funds made available under this act and subsequent appropri- 
ations for the project were applied exclusively to dredging in Curri- 
tuck Sound up to 1881, as it was not considered necessary to deepen 
the channel across North River Bar until deeper channels than then 
existed had been secured in Currituck Sound. As money was not 
appropriated in sufficiently large amounts to complete the work in a 
short period to full project dimensions, the channels dredged were 
made 50 feet wide instead of 80 feet wide, but the 9-foot project depth 
was adhered to. 

The river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, modified the project 
so as to include Coinjock Bay, through which the Albemarle & 
Chesapeake Canal Co. had heretofore maintained a dredged cut. 
A project was submitted to the Chief of Engineers by Capt. Charles 
B. Phillips, Corps of Engineers, for the improvement of the chan- 
nel through this bay, under date of December 28, 1880 (H. Doc. No. 
28, 46th Cong., 3d sess., and Annual Report for 1881, p. 999), at an 
estimated cost of $53,213.95, which was subsequently approved and 
formed the basis of the work afterwards done. The proposed plan 
of improvement provided for a channel 9 feet deep and 80 feet wide, 
protected by a shell dike on its west side. 

Contracts for dredging in Currituck Sound and Coinjock Bay 
were entered into from time to time as funds for the purpose became 
available until 1889, when a channel 50 feet wide, 9 feet deep at ordi- 
nary winter stages, and 10.5 miles long was reported as having been 
secured in Currituck Sound, and a channel from 40 to 80 feet wide, 
9 feet deep at ordinary winter stages, and protected by a shell dike 
on its west bank was reported as having been provided in Coin- 
jock Bay. 

The original project was further modified by the river and harbor 
act of March 3, 1881, when for the first time North River, N. C, 
was brought under the project. No work, however, was done upon 
this stream prior to the consolidation of the separate projects in 
1890. 

In his report for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1885, Capt. F. A. 
Hinman, Corps of Engineers, recommended dredging a channel 
7,150 feet long, 150 feet wide, and 9.4 feet deep at ordinary low 
water across North River Bar, at an estimated cost of $11,354.10. 
.This work was done by contract in 1887 and 1888, but on account 
of insufficient funds a channel 8,350 feet long, only 40 feet wide, 
and 9.8 feet deep at ordinary low water was secured across the bar. 

The amount spent upon Currituck Sound, Coinjock Bay, and 
North River Bar up to the time of the consolidation of the separate 
projects was $142,500. While the project depth was everywhere 
obtained, the full project width was attained at but few places on 
these waterways. 



1802 REPOET OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

10. INLAND WATERWAY FROM NORFOLK, VA., TO BEAUFORT 
INLET, N. C. 

The scope of previous projects will be found under the projects 
absorbed by this improvement. 

12. BLACKWATER RIVER, VA. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of June 18, 1878, 
was based upon a report upon an examination of the part of the river 
between Franklin, Va., and the mouth bv United States Civil Engi- 
neer S. T. Abert, dated March 3, 1875 (Annual Report for 1875, pt. 2, 
p. 161), in which the dredging of points at a number of sharp bends, 
the dredging of shoals, the removal of snags and logs, and the cut- 
ting of overhanging trees were proposed, at an estimated cost of 
$14,850. Work upon the project was carried on under various appro- 
priations until 1884, at a cost of $14,000, when the project was con- 
sidered practically completed, a navigable channel with a minimum 
depth of 9 feet and of ample width was reported as having been 
secured. 

No further work was done upon the river until after the adoption 
of the present project. 

13. MEHERRIN RIVER, N. C. 

The previous project adopted by the river and harbor act of Au- 
gust 2, 1883, was based upon an examination and survey report, dated 
January 16, 1882, by Capt. James Mercur, Corps of Engineers (An- 
nual Report for 1882, p. 1114), in which the improvement of the 
stream below Murfreesboro, N. C, by a small amount of dredging 
and snagging was proposed, at an estimated cost of $12,500. An esti- 
mate of $4,000 was also submitted for improving the river above 
Murfreesboro to Princeton Landing, a distance of 5 miles. An ap- 
propriation of $5,000 was made by the act adopting the project, 
$4,584.53 of which was expended between Murfreesboro and the 
mouth in the removal of sunken logs, snags, and trees from the 
channel of the river between the years 1883 and 1885. A minimum 
depth of 8 feet was obtained by the project, but the improvement 
was subsequently abandoned, and the balance of the funds remaining 
turned into the Treasury, because no permanent benefit could bo do- 
rived from the work, as logs and similar obstructions were permitted 
to sink in the river. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE WILMINGTON, 
N. C, DISTRICT. 



1. SCUPPERNONG RIVER, N. C. 

The original project, adopted by the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1879, was to dredge the bar at the mouth of the river to 
obtain a channel 80 feet wide and 9 feet deep at low water, and to 
make cut-offs at sharp bends and to remove obstructions up to 
Spruills Bridge. The sum of $8,000 was expended on this project. 



APPENDIX. 1803 

5. PAMLICO AND TAR RIVERS, N. C. 

The original project for the improvement of Pamlico River (that 
is, the portion below Washington, N. C), adopted by the river and 
harbor act of July 4, 1836, provided for the removal of a sand shoal. 
Xo records are available as to the location of this shoal or the depth 
and width to be obtained. Fifteen thousand dollars was expended on 
this project prior to 1853. 

10. NEUSB AND TRENT RIVERS, N. C. 

(b) TRENT RIVER. 

The original project, adopted bv the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1879 (H. Ex. Doc. No. 68, 45th Cong., 3d sess.), provided 
for securing a channel 3 feet in depth at extreme low summer stage 
of water, with a width of 50 feet to Trenton. It was proposed to do 
but little work below Polloksville except to cut off a bend about 4 
miles below the town. The estimated cost was $22,000. This esti- 
mate was increased in 1885 to $57,000 and in 1887 to $59,000. In 
1889 the project was extended to clear out natural obstructions from 
Trenton upward for small steamboats over the first 30 miles and 
for pole boats for the remaining distance to the Upper Quaker 
Bridge, at an estimated cost of $13,000 and an estimated annual 
maintenance cost of $6,000. 

In 1895 Maj. TV. S. Stanton, district officer, reported it was his 
opinion that further effort to improve that part of the river from 
Trenton to the Upper Quaker Bridge should be given up by the 
United States, because it contained many bars of sand and rock or 
gravel, of which many had depths of only 12 to 18 inches; and if 
improved, the desire of the people interested was for drainage and 
not navigation. 

In 1896 Lieut. Col. D. P. Heap, district officer, recommended the 
modification of the project to include maintenance below Trenton 
only and a channel only 30 feet wide and 3 feet deep. This modifi- 
cation was approved by the Chief of Engineers May 20, 1896. The 
total expenditure on these projects was $98,010.39, of which $70,905.40 
was for improvement and $27,104.99 for maintenance. 

14. HARBOR AT BEAUFORT, N. C. 

The original project, adopted by the river and harbor act of July 4, 
1836 (H. Doc. 482, 55th Cong., 2d sess.), provided for the improve- 
ment of the harbor, no data showing the scope of the improvement 
being available. Five thousand dollars was expended on this project. 

18. NEW RIVER AND WATERWAYS TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 
(a) NEW RIVER. 

The river and harbor act of July 4, 1836, appropriated $5,000 for 
removing the oyster shoal in New River by dredging. The acts of 
March 3, 1837, and July 7, 1838, appropriated $20,000 and $25,000, 
respectively, for further improvement, the scope of which is not a 
matter of record. 



1804 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

The first project after the Civil War, adopted by the river and 
harbor act of August 2, 1882, proposed to secure a 150-foot channel 
5 feet deep at low water from the upper river to the ocean l>v 
dredging, at an estimated cost of $40,000. (Ex. Doc. No. 169, 47th 
Cong., 1st sess.) This project was modified in 1886 by changing the 
location of the proposed dredging, and providing to start channels 
150 feet wide and 4 feet deep at mean low water through Wrights 
Island and Cedar Bush Marsh, at an estimated cost of $40,000. (An- 
nual Report for 1885, p. 1082.) Both these cuts Avere completed 
with various widths to the project depth, but the Cedar Bush Marsh 
Cut deteriorated at the upper end, and its abandonment was directed 
by the Chief of Engineers May 7, 1893. 

The project of June 18, 1894 (Annual Eeport for 1894, pp. 1038- 
1039), to obtain 4 feet depth around Cedar Bush Marsh by dredging, 
and an experimental timber-training wall, at an estimated cost of 
$5,000, was adopted and successfully carried out. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, authorized the balance 
from the project of 1894 to be expended in rebuilding the dike 
hitherto constructed. (H. Doc. No. 239, 58th Cong., 2d sess.; 
Annual Report for 1904, p. 1537.) Under this authority the dike was 
rebuilt with oyster shells. There was expended on these projects 
$83,807.82. 

19. CAPE FEAR RIVER, N. C, AT AND BELOW WILMINGTON. 

The original project, adopted by the river and harbor act of March 
2, 1829, was to deepen by jetties the channel through the shoals in 
the 8 miles next below Wilmington. This project resulted in a gain 
of 2 feet available depth. The project adopted by the river and 
harbor act of July 22, 1854, was to straighten and deepen the bar 
channel by dredging, jettying, diverting flow from the New Inlet, 
and closing breaches in Zekes Island. This project was incomplete 
when the Civil War began. 

Expenditures prior to Civil War (including balance transferred), 
$363,228.92. 

After the Civil War the first project was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of July 11, 1870, to deepen the bar channel by closing 
breaches between Smiths and Zekes Islands, with the ultimate closure 
of New Inlet in view. The project adopted by the river and harbor 
act of March 3, 1873, included that of 1870. and in addition the 
dredging of the bar channel and closing of New Inlet. The project 
adopted by the river and harbor act of June 23, 1871. was to obtain 
by dredging a channel 100 feet wide and 12 feet deep at mean low 
water up to Wilmington. The project adopted by the river and 
harbor act of March 3, 1881, was to obtain by dredging a channel 270 
feet wide and 16 feet deep at low water up to Wilmington. These 
projects had been practically completed in 1889. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of September 19. 
1890 (Annual Report for 1889, p. 1132), was to obtain a mean low- 
water depth of 20 feet and a width of 270 feet from Wilmington to 
the ocean, at an estimated cost of $1,800,000. This project was modi- 
fied by the river and harbor act of June 13. 190-2. to authorize the 
construction of mooring dolphins at Wilmington at a cost of $30,000. 
and to provide for the removal of obstructions at the mouth of 



APPENDIX. 1805 

Brunswick River, at an estimated cost of $1,000. (H. Doc. No. 180, 
56th Cong., 2d sess.) 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of March 2, 1907, 
provided for continuing improvement in accordance with report 
submitted in House Document No. 545, Fifty-ninth Congress, first 
session, for completion of the 20-foot project to the projected width 
by dredging and the excavation of a mooring basin in lieu of con- 
structing mooring dolphins at Wilmington. The act also authorized 
improvement to such depth in excess of 20 feet as appropriations 
for the work might permit, due regard being given to the difference in 
tidal oscillation at the upper and lower portions of the improvement, 
and authorized so much as might be necessary of the funds available 
to be applied to repairing the New Inlet and Swash Defense Dams. 
The cost of these repairs was estimated at $165,000. Annual main- 
tenance was estimated to cost $65,000. 

Total expenditures on the above projects, including expenditures 
prior to Civil War, $5,240,572.39. 

20. CAPE FEAR RIVER, N. 0., ABOVE WILMINGTON (LOCKS AND 

DAMS). 

The first slack-water project was adopted by the river and harbor 
act of June 13, 1902, and provided for the construction of three locks 
and dams at a cost of $1,350,000 to afford a depth of 8 feet at mean 
low water between Wilmington and Fayette ville. (H. Doc. No. 180, 
56th Cong., 2d sess., or p. 1552 Annual Report for 1901.) Fifty 
thousand dollars was appropriated under this project, and of this 
amount $14,682.23 was expended for surveys and purchase of land 
at Kings Bluff. The balance of this appropriation ($35,317.77) was 
later covered into the surplus fund in accordance with section 10 of 
the sundry civil act of March 9, 1909. The present project was 
adopted June 25, 1910. 

21. (c) CAPE FEAR RIVER, N. C, ABOVE WILMINGTON. 

The original project adopted by the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1881, proposed to biry out the navigation rights of private 
parties, then to clear out the natural obstructions in the river and 
to further provide a continuous channel over the 66 miles imme- 
diately below Fayetteville by dredging and by contracting its water- 
way by jetties through at least 32 shoals. (Ex. Doc. No. 78. 46th 
Cong., 3d sess., and pp. 741-749, Annual Report for 1872.)' No 
depth or width of channel was specified, but in 1885 it had resolved 
itself into an attempt to " secure a thoroughly cleared 4-foot channel 
from Wilmington (73 miles) to Elizabethtown, thence a similar 
3-foot channel 42 miles farther to Fayetteville, at all ordinary 
stages of water," estimated to cost $480,200. This project was in 
force until June 13, 1902, when it was abandoned, except for main- 
tenance of the natural channel, pending the construction of locks 
and dams as authorized by the river and harbor act of June 25, 1910. 
From the beginning until the abandonment of the project $134,439.96 
was expended for improvement and $8,177.67 for maintenance, mak- 
ing a total of $142,617.63 expended on this work. When the project 



1806 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, TJ. S. ARMY. 

was abandoned the governing low-water depths were 4 feet from 
Wilmington to Kellys Cove, 2^ feet to Elizabethtown, and 2 feet to 
Fayetteville. Since the abandonment of this project various allot- 
ments have been made for maintenance from the joint appropriation 
for Northeast, Black, and Cape Fear Rivers, N. C. 

22. SHALLOTTE RIVER, N. C. 

The river and harbor act of Congress approved March 2, 1907, 
appropriated $3,000 to be expended on this river. This appropria- 
tion not being based on any project, the project submitted to and 
approved by the Chief of Engineers for the expenditure of the funds 
available became the project. This project was to dredge a channel 
35 feet wide and 4 feet deep at low water, following the best water 
along the western shore, between a point 2i| miles above the inlet and 
a point 4 miles above the inlet. Three thousand dollars was expended 
on this project, which was completed. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENTS OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE CHARLESTON 
(S. C.) DISTRICT. 



4. WINYAH BAY, S. C. 

Georgetown Harbor. — Operations for the improvement of naviga- 
tion in Winyah Bay were begun in December, 1884, under a project 
to secure a channel 200 feet wide, 12 feet deep, and 2.850 feet long 
through the Sampit River bar immediately below Georgetown. The 
estimated cost was $14,000, but this was increased at various times up 
to 1889, when it was placed at $44,500. This amount was eventually 
appropriated. The increase was occasioned by the fact that the pro- 
posed channel traversed a submerged cypress swamp, which increased 
the cost of dredging, and also by the inadequate appropriations, 
which permitted damage to unfinished work and deterioration of 
plant, as well as extra superintendence. This project was completed 
January 10, 1893, at a total cost of $42,146.31, full channel dimen- 
sions having been obtained. 

The work thereafter consisted in the removal of an occasional snag 
until 1900-1901, when the dredged cut. having shoaled and narrowed. 
was redredged to the extent of the available balance. This restored 
the channel to full depth for a width of about 125 feet. By the acts 
of June 6, 1900, and June 13, 1902, this project was virtually merged 
with that for Winyah Bay, in that legal authority was given to- use 
any dredges employed in connection with the improvement of Win- 
yah Bay for the purpose of dredging shoal places between the outer 
bar and the city of Georgetown, S. C. 

Winyah Bay. — In the meantime the river and harbor act of Au- 
gust 5, 1886, had adopted a project to secure a channel not less than 
15 feet deep at mean low water, to be obtained by two jetties spring- 
ing, respectively, from North and South Islands and converging to 
4,000 feet at the 18-foot curve on the seaward side of the bar. These 



APPENDIX. 1807 

were to be constructed on a mattress foundation, with a riprap stone 
superstructure to a height of 6 feet above mean low water. As orig- 
inally projected the north jetty was to be 10,700 feet and the south 
jetty 17,500 feet long. Construction work on the north jetty actually 
began on February 4, 1890, the interval since the adoption of the 
project having been occupied in surveys, studies of foundation con- 
ditions, construction of plant, and other preparations. 

Under authority of the Chief of Engineers work was begun in 
1892 on an earthen dike along the shore line of South Island, at the 
southerly side of the bay. Its purpose was to maintain the shore line, 
which had hitherto been held by a range of sand dunes. These had 
been swept away by storms, and it was necessary to prevent hurtful 
changes in the tidal regimen of the bay, caused by overflow at high 
tide from an extensive marsh in rear. The effect of this dike was 
augmented by " spur jetties " and some post-and-brush " sand catch- 
ers," or groins. This dike really served as the root of the south jetty, 
and as eventually built was 14,300 feet long. It has been necessary to 
repair it at intervals from the very first. 

By the act of June 3, 1896, this project was placed under the con- 
tinuing contract system at a cost not to exceed $2,016,250, inclusive of 
the $20,000 appropriated in that act. Work on the south jetty began 
March 15, 1898. The seagoing suction dredge was built and placed 
on the work September 19, 1898. By June 30, 1903, the north jetty 
had been carried out to the seaward end. It was then 11,139 feet 
long with a crest 4£ to 6 feet above mean low water, except that the 
outer 100 feet was submerged. At this time a depth of 15 feet had 
been obtained throughout the entrance, with a least width of 300 
feet, and shoals within the bay had been improved. The south jetty 
was completed in 1904. It was 21,051 feet long with crest heights 
varying from 10 feet above mean low water at the inner end to 
nothing at the outer end. Thereafter dredging continued until June 
30, 1909, when the 15 foot project was virtually completed. It was 
maintained until June 30, 1912, when the present project had been 
completed to such an extent as to render unnecessary any work on the 
previous project. Up to June 30, 1912, the expenditures on the 15- 
foot project had amounted to $2,398,351.88 for new work and $123,- 
858.64 for maintenance, exclusive of the old Georgetown Harbor 
project. 

5. MINGO CREEK, S. G. 

The original project adopted by the river and harbor act of 
August 11, 1888, provided for a channel adequate for 5-foot-draft 
steam navigation to Williams Landing, and thence for a 5-foot-draft 
winter pole-boat navigation up to the head of such useful naviga- 
tion, about 31 miles. This improvement was to be secured by snag- 
ging and clearing. Dredging was not contemplated. The estimated 
cost was $17,000, which was eventually appropriated. Work began 
on January 28, 1889, and a certain amount of snagging was done 
yearly thereafter up to 1897, excepting the year 1896, at which time 
the creek had been well cleared up to Williams Landing. By June 
30, 1897, the appropriation was exhausted. That portion of the 
river for which steamboat navigation was projected had been thor- 
oughly snagged, and steamers ran both by night and by day and at 



1808 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

either high or low water. The upper part of the creek had not 
been cleared. 

No work was done thereafter until 1905-6 when, deterioration hav- 
ing occurred, $300 was allotted for the removal of obstructions and 
overhanging trees. Again, on March 18, 1908, $300 was allotted for 
a similar purpose. This provided for a draft of 8 feet to Hemming- 
way Bridge, 11 miles. By the river and harbor acts of June 25, 
1910, and February 27, 1911, $2,000 was appropriated, none of which 
had been expended on the original project but was merged with the 
appropriation of July 25, 1912, for the present project. 

6. SANTEE, WATEREE, AND CONGAREE RIVERS, AND ESTHERVILLE- 
MINIM CREEK CANAL, S. C. 

(a) SANTEE RIVER AND ESTHERVILLE- MINIM CREEK CANAL. 

The Colony and State of South Carolina in 1734, 1786, and 1809 
undertook to improve this river, and especially its connection with 
the sea. 

The original project adopted by the river and harbor act of March 
3, 1881, contemplated securing unobstructed navigation of 7 feet at 
low water up to Wrights Bluff, about 120 miles from the ocean, and 
thence a 5-foot depth 23 miles farther to the confluence of the 
Wateree and Congaree Rivers. This was to be accomplished by 
snagging and clearing the river of overhanging trees and brush by 
blasting out a small rock shoal at one point on the upper river and 
by dredging at another shoal. A feature of the project was the 
conversion of Mosquito Creek into a canal to join the Santee River 
with Winyah Bay and thus avoid the passage of the Santee River 
Bar. Mosquito Creek was a tortuous tidal connection between the 
two bodies of water, and the project called for dredging and straight- 
ening to afford a 7-foot channel 50 feet wide and about 7 miles 
long. The original estimate placed the cost at $101,427.40. The total 
final cost of this work was estimated in 1886 at $271,300 for the outlet 
through Mosquito Creek and $75,200 for the Santee River proper, or 
a total of $346,500. By 1889 it had become evident that the canal 
would not prove adequate and satisfactory. The creek entrances were 
narrow, crooked, and shallow so that only rafts and boats not over 
75 feet long,. 18 feet wide, and 3 feet draft could pass entirely 
through from Winyah Bay to Santee River. The route was very 
exposed and liable to complete obliteration. Accordingly the present 
project was adopted by the river and harbor act of September 19, 
1890. 

9. CHARLESTON HARBOR, S. C. (INCLUDING ASHLEY RIVER AND 
SHIPYARD CREEK). 

(a) CHARLESTON HARBOR. 

Between 1871 and the spring of 1878 the General Government 
had expended the sum of $93,700 in taking up the wrecks of 14 iron- 
clad and wooden vessels sunk during the war and in removing a 
portion of the Bowman Jetty projecting into Beach Channel with a 
view of improving the navigable channels of Charleston Harbor. 



APPENDIX. 1809 

The original project, adopted in 1878, provided for establishing 
and maintaining by means of two jetties and auxiliary dredging a 
low-water channel of not less than 21 feet depth across the bar. The 
Swash Channel was selected for improvement. The estimated cost 
was $3,000,000. 

In 1888 it became necessary to modify the height of the crest line 
of the jetties and to revise the estimate. This increase in the 
estimate was largely due to the fact that money had been appro- 
priated so slowty that reasonable contract prices could not be 
obtained. The annual appropriation up to that time had been only 
5^ per cent of the original estimate. In the revised project the 
jetties were increased in height and length, but no change was made 
in their position or distance apart. The revised estimates were 
$4,380,500 if the jetties were brought up to low-water level through- 
out, and $5,331,500 if brought up 3 feet higher. The former estimate 
was adopted by Congress in the river and harbor act approved July' 
13, 1892. 

Under this project the jetties were completed in 1895 at a cost of 
$3,432,223, the north jetty having a total length of 15,443 feet and 
the south jetty of 19,104 feet, the width between them at the outer 
ends being 2.900 feet. The jetties had been brought to a height of 
12 feet above low water for the greater portion of the length. 

Dredging had also been carried on, a seagoing suction dredge hav- 
ing been constructed, and by June 30, 1899, a channel 250 feet wide 
and 21 feet deep had been procured. The total expenditures on the 
21-foot project to this date were $4,037,256.70, of which about 
$670,000 was for dredging. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act approved March 3, 
1899, provided for obtaining a channel at the entrance to Charleston 
Harbor not less than 26 feet deep at mean low water (mean range 
of tide about 5.2 feet) and 600 feet wide, by constructing a large 
seagoing suction dredge, at a cost not exceeding $150,000, and oper- 
ating it, together with the existing dredge Charleston, for three 
years. The estimated cost of constructing the new dredge and oper- 
ating all dredges, as above, was $285,000. Of this amount $175,000 
had been appropriated prior to the enactment of the river and har- 
bor act of June 13, 1902, which made available an additional sum of 
$208,000, increasing to $383,000 the amount authorized for the proj- 
ect for the new dredge and its operation. The entire amount author- 
ized was appropriated. 

This project was completed in September, 1906. Up to June 30, 
1910, $636,749.86 had been expended, including $41,943.37 for main- 
tenance during the four years since the completion. 

(h) ASHLEY RIVER, S. C. 

In 1880 the river was obstructed by two shoals in the lower part 
of the river, at a place named Accabee and just below the Wando 
Phosphate Works, with not over 9 feet of water on them. 

By the act of Congress approved June 14, 1880, a depth of from 
10 to 11 feet was to be secured by dredging. The plan comprised 
(1) the removal of a shoal at a place named Accabee, about 8 miles 
above the chVy of Charleston, where, according to a survey made in 
1873, there was then only 9 feet of water at low tide, and (2) the 
8373°— eng 1915 114 



1810 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

removal of a shoal just below the Wando Phosphate Works, where 
only 6 feet of Avater was found at low tide. 

Four appropriations made for this work between June 14, 1880, 
and August 5, 1886, aggregating $5,500, were expended in improv- 
ing the river at the places named above, securing and maintaining 
low-water depths of from 10 to 11 feet on widths of from 100 to 200 
feet. 

Between June 14, 1880, and June 30. 1802, 26,125 cubic yards of 
material had been removed and the desired depth had been secured 
and maintained. Dividing the total expenditures for all purposes 
to June 30, 1894, by the number of cubic yards dredged shows the 
cost to have been 21 cents per cubic yard. All dredging was done 
by contract. The total expenditures to June 30, 1895. were $5,500. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE SAVANNAH, GA., 
DISTRICT. 



1. SAVANNAH HARBOR, GA. 

Appropriations for the improvement of this harbor were made 
between 1826 and 1852, inclusive, amounting to $188,430.0-2. and had 
reference to the removal of natural and artificial obstructions, but 
the first comprehensive plan of improvement is dated February 11, 
1853, which briefly was as follows (Annual Report for 1^73. p. T".7 ) : 
" In Februaiy, 1853, a commission, organized under the War Depart- 
ment, * * * devised a project for the removal of obstructions 
in Savannah River at a place called 'The Wrecks' and the improve- 
ment of the navigation of said river," which received the approval 
of the Chief of Engineers and of Mr. Conrad, then Secretary of 
War. The essential features of this plan are as follows : 

1. To deepen, widen, and straighten the channel over The Wrecks. 

2. To close the channel between Fig and Hutchinson Islands. 

3. To build a jetty at the lower end of Fig Island so as to deflect a consider- 
able portion of the flood from Back River to Front River. 

4. To build a deflecting work above Kings Island r to increase the volume of 
ebb entering Front River. 

5. To dredge at Tybee Knoll and other points as might be necessary. 

The next plan of improvement is dated August 28. 1872, published 
in the Report of the Chief of Engineers for that year, page 653. 
This plan contemplated the removal of obstructions in the vicinity 
of Fort Jackson, in the North Channel opposite the upper end of 
Elba Island, and dredging at site of removal of these wrecks; also 
the dredging of a channel 125 feet Avide. later changed to 250 feet. 
to depths from 12 to 12^ feet at five localities between the city of 
Savannah and Fort Pulaski. The total cost of this improvement 
was estimated to be $128,700 (Annual Report for 1872. p. 665). The 
Annual Report for 1873, page 734, gives the following summary of 
the work: 

During previous years since January 1, 1S65, a considerable amounl <»f work 
has been done under other auspices comprising, first, the opening of a narrow- 
ship channel through the line of cribs opposite the upper end of Elba Island in 
January, 1865; second, the removal of a number of wrecks, crii>s, and other 



APPENDIX. 1811 

obstructions by Mr. H. S. Welles under contract made May 1 and February 5, 
1866, with the Treasury Department, annulled by the same authority January 
18, 1S70; third, dredging by the city of Savannah at a cost of about .$157,000 
expended for dredge boats, scows, steam tugs, labor, and superintendence prior 
to January 1, 1S72, not including interest on original outlay. Total expendi- 
ture on Savannah Harbor from 1853 to January 1, 1872, was $454,132.96. 

A project, adopted June 23, 1874:, for 22 feet at high water, is 
outlined on page 747, Annual Report for 1873, and consisted of, 
first, the closing of Cross Tides by a crib dam with an opening for 
small vessels, the enlarging of the waterway opposite the city front 
to an average of 575 feet wide and 15 feet deep, the dredging from 
the city to the Knoll with a view of obtaining approximately 15| 
feet at low water, and the construction of a bulkhead just above 
Kinseys Mill, at a total cost of $481,320. 

Minor changes of the above project were made by the board of 
engineers, as given in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers 
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1876, page 77. Further modifi- 
cations of the 22-foot high-water project are given in the Annual 
Report of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year ending June 30, 
1880, page 946. In this latter report of the board of engineers the 
project is approved with modifications, closing the channel between 
the islands and the North Channel, these channels being between 
Elba and Cockspur Islands; also including a sill dam at the head 
of South Channel. Cross Tides Dam is limited to 5-J feet above the 
bottom. The dredging work to be carried on simultaneous to the 
work of closing the side channels to keep the cross sections balanced. 
Steps were taken to widen the waterway in front of Fig Island. 

The above are all the modifications of the 22-foot project at high 
water, and up to the adoption of the 26-foot project there had been 
expended upon this plan of improvement $1,207,964.95. 

Just prior to the adoption of the 26-foot project there was reported 
and printed (H. Doc. No. 57, 50th Cong., 1st sess.) a proposed pro- 
ject for obtaining 28 feet at high water. This project considers the 
increasing of the tidal cross sections above the city by dredging 
Drakies Cut and portions of the channel and also for the construc- 
tion of Cross Tides Dam to high w-ater and the improvement of 
various stretches of the river from the upper portion of the city to 
the sea by means of contraction work, closing dams, and dredging, 
with an elaborate system of twin jetties at the mouth of the river, at a 
total cost of $6,660,000, including engineering and contingencies. 
However, this project was not adopted, but was later modified and 
considerably reduced in scope, as printed in House Document No. 
123, Fifty-sixth Congress, second session, which Avas adopted by the 
river and harbor act of 1902, and has been termed the "28-foot 
project " and is touched upon later. 

The "26-foot project at high water," as given in the Annual Re- 
port of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year ending June 30, 
1890, pages 1259-1263, was adopted September 19, 1890, and con- 
templated the enlargement of Drakies Cut, as indicated in the origi- 
nal project; the entire or partial removal of Kings Island; the con- 
struction of a deflecting jetty from Argyle Island; the partial re- 
moval of Marsh Island and the closing of the channel north of it: 
the construction of a training wall from the lower end of Marsh 
Island to MacKay Point and the widening of the unduly contracted 



1812 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

region below this point, all with a view to diverting a greater 
volume of flow through Front River. Contraction works were to be 
placed at Gardners Bank and Wrecks Channel. A deflecting jetty 
to be run out from MacKay Point in order to divert a greater ebb 
volume into the North Channel. 

Besides the dredging as required to open the river as outlined 
above, a channel 26 feet deep at mean high water from the old water- 
works to the sea was provided for. 

The cross channels, or openings, between North and South Chan- 
nels were to be closed and training walls and shore protections to be 
constructed between lower flats and oyster bed, with other minor work. 
The total estimated cost of the above was $3,537,720. 

The project as outlined was practically completed in 1896, at which 
time there was a very great improvement in the channel depth 
amounting to a clear gain of 9 feet, and was modified under a report 
of the Board of Engineers dated June 22, 1896, which was based upon 
the provisions of the river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, which 
specifically named the projects dated December 7, 1894, and July 1, 
1895, as regards Savannah Harbor, and that of January 22, 1895, 
for the steamboat channel by route No. 2 between Beaufort, S. C, 
and Savannah, Ga. All these projects assumed the continuance of 
the general improvement of 1890, including dredging, and modified 
it only by extension of certain walls and by additions of special 
features of work. The work thus specially named was as follows: 

First. General dredging in the navigable channel at numerous points. (Pro- 
ject of July 1, 1895, as published in Annual Report for 1895. ) 

Second. Special dredging to secure the removal of the Middle Ground Shoal, 
opposite the quarantine, at an estimated cost of $350,000, paid for out of funds 
appropriated June 3, 1896. (Project of July 1, 1895, as published in Annual 
Report for 1895.) 

Third. The construction of an extension of the oyster bed training wall, 
2,500 feet long, and to a height of mean low water, together with — 

Fourth. The construction of a detached portion of the same wall S.000 feet 
long to a height of mean high water to lie along the crest of the shoal between 
Calibouge Sound and Tybee Roads, to serve as a breakwater to shelter the 
Tybee Roads anchorage grounds, at an estimated cost of .$992,250 for both con- 
structions, paid for out of the funds appropriated later by the river and harbor 
act of June 1, 1896. (Project of Dec. 7, 1894, H. Doc. No. 115, 53d Cong., 
3d sess.) 

Fifth. Dredging in Ramshorn Creek and Wrights River and extension of 
existing dam (No. 31) below the mouth of Wrights River to complete a steam- 
boat channel of 7 feet at mean low water from Beaufort, S. C, to Savannah, 
Ga., at an estimated cost of $106,700, the connection between deep water and 
Wrights River and that in Savannah Harbor to be 'made along the line described 
as route No. 2. (Project of Jan. 2, 1895, published as H. Doc. No. 295, 53d Cong., 
3d sess.) 

This project was further modified upon the date of September 26, 
1898, by the Board of Engineers, as follows: The removal of Cross 
Tides Dam; to maintain all the existing walls and dams; to do the 
necessary dredging to obtain and maintain a channel from Savannah 
to the sea suitable for vessels of 24-foot draft at mean high water: 
to establish and maintain three mooring dolphins between Savannah 
and the sea; to open and maintain a steamboat channel of sufficient 
width and 7 feet depth at low water froiu Beaufort, S. C, to Savan- 
nah, Ga., by way of Mud River, and to open and maintain a small- 
boat passage of 20 feet width and 3 feet depth at low water through 
the dikes and training walls near the foot of Elba Island. 



APPENDIX. 1813 

This was the last modification of what is termed the "26-foot proj- 
ect," the total expenditures upon which amounted to $4,065,467.42. 

(Note. — The money expended for steamboat channel between Savannah, Ga., 
and Beaufort, S. 0., is now accounted for as a separate work by authority of 
Chief of Engineers, May 17, 1915.) 

The next plan for improvement was for 28 feet at mean high water 
(H. Doc. No. 123, 56th Cong., 2d sess.), which is a modification of 
the project as outlined in House Document No. 57, Fiftieth Con- 
gress, first session. This project was adopted by Congress June 13, 
1902, and provided for the establishment of a channel from the old 
waterworks to the sea 28 feet deep at mean high water, with a bottom 
width of from 350 to 500 feet, to be accomplished by dredging and 
the raising of all existing training walls between Savannah and 
Tybee Eoads. It also provided for the construction of mooring 
dolphins in the harbor at two points, namely, the Bight and Venus 
Point. The estimated cost of the work was originally $1,567,791. 
This amount was increased by $210,000 by the river and harbor act 
approved March 3, 1905. This project was practically completed in 
1905 at a cost of $1,643,282.29. 

2. SAVANNAH RIVER BELOW AUGUSTA, GA. 

The first appropriation for this work was made by the river and 
harbor act of March 3, 1881, which adopted a project (H. Doc. No. 
23, 46th Cong., 3d sess., and Annual Report for 1881, p. 1090) which 
stated : 

The plan of improvement * * * consists essentially of narrowing the 
river by low wing dams of brush and stone at points where excessive widths 
produce shoal ; in aiding the formation of the low-water channel in a few 
localities by dredging; in removing snags, floating and overhanging trees, and 
pile obstructions, and in cutting off some projecting points. The object of these 
works is to establish a low-river navigable depth of 5 feet, and it is thought 
that this can be accomplished by narrowing the stream to a low-water width 
of about 400 feet or less. 

To promote the building up of the bed of the river in the intervals 
between wing dams it was provided that two low hurdle traverses 
should be placed in each such interval. Caving banks were to be 
protected by thin flexible brush mattresses, weighted with stone. The 
estimated cost of the work under this project was $91,000, of which 
$25,000 was for the construction of a snag boat. No estimate was 
made for maintenance. There was expended under this project 
$93,480.09. 

4. SAVANNAH RIVER ABOVE AUGUSTA, GA. 

The first project for this work (Annual Report for 1879, p. 747) 
was adopted by the river and harbor act of June 14, 1880. This 
project was based on an examination without a survey, and provided 
for obtaining between Augusta and Trotters Shoals, a distance of 64 
miles, a 3-foot pole-boat channel, 30 feet wide, at an estimated cost of 
$45,000. No estimate for maintenance was made. The channel was 
to be obtained by cutting through rock ledges, constructing rock wing 
dams, removing bowlders and other obstructions, and dredging. 
There was expended under this project $39,000. 



1814 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

5. INLAND WATERWAY BETWEEN SAVANNAH, GA., AND BEAUFORT, 

S. C. 

The first project for this waterway was that adopted by the river 
and harbor act of June 3, 1896. It is that described as " Route 2 " in 
House Document No. 295, Fifty-third Congress, third session. This 
report was reprinted, without maps, in the Annual Report of the 
Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1895. page 1521. 

The improvement of Savannah Harbor had included the closure 
of the olcl passages from the inland waterway to this harbor. On 
account of this the project for this waterway, which provided for 
the cutting of a new passage, was included by the river and "harbor 
act of June 3, 1896, in the project for Savannah Harbor, adopted by 
the same act. The route selected was through Beaufort River. Port 
Royal Sound, Skull Creek, Calibogue Sound, Cooper River, Rams- 
horn Creek, New River, Walls Cut, Wrights River, and Savannah 
River. The project provided for a 7-foot channel, which was to be 
obtained by dredging at Ramshorn Creek and Wrights River, and 
by the construction of a dam 2,800 feet long connecting Dam 31 with 
Turtle Island. The estimated cost of improvement by this route 
was $106,700. No estimate was made for maintenance. This project 
was not fully completed, as it was found that the entrance into the 
Savannah River so near its mouth was undesirable, on account of its 
being too much exposed. 

8. DARIEN HARBOR (AND DOBOY BAR), GA. 

The first appropriation for Darien Harbor, amounting to $8,000, 
was made by the river and harbor act of June 18, 1878. without any 
project having been recommended or adopted. This sum was all 
spent in dredging, under contract. Channels 50 feet wide and 10 feet 
deep at mean low water, and aggregating 500 yards in length, were 
dredged through two shoals in Darien River north of Generals 
Island ; a channel 75 feet wide, 14 feet deep, and 500 yards long was 
dredged in the North River below the Union Island sawmills and 
at the confluence of the Darien and North Rivers, known as the 
"Break," the channel was deepened from 8 to 12 feet and widened 
to 75 feet at mean low water. The aggregate quantity of materials 
removed amounted to 51.041 cubic yards. The increased depths 
secured vary from 2 to 4 feet. 

The river and harbor act of June 13. 1902. by making a single 
appropriation for the two, combined the improvement at Darien 
Harbor and Doboy Bar into a single work. These works were after- 
wards separated by the river and harbor act of June 25. 1910, which 
made an appropriation for Darien Harbor alone, the improvement 
of Doboy Bar being virtually abandoned. 

Prior to the submission or adoption of any project for Dobov Bar 
the river and harbor act of August 5. 1886. provided that $10,000 
from the appropriation of the Altamaha, or as much of it as should 
be necessary, was to be used for the improvement of Doboy Bar. 
Under a project for the expenditure of these funds submitted Decem- 
ber 11, 1886 (Annual Report for 1887, p. 1199), a small inner shoal 
was removed and a cut through the bar was attempted by harrowing 
and agitating the material of the bar with a water jet during the ebb 



APPENDIX. 1815 

flow, when heavy northeasterly storms set in and interrupted the 
work. An examination made after about two weeks of storms 
showed no trace of the cut, which had been about 600 feet long, 60 
feet wide, and from 2 to 3 feet deep. This work, which was experi- 
mental, had cost $5,795.40 and was not resumed. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, adopted a project for 
dredging a channel through Doboy Bar to the north of the existing 
channel 21 feet deep at mean high water and 300 feet wide, requir- 
ing the removal of 150,000 cubic yards of material, at an estimated 
cost of $70,000. (H. Doc. No. 13, 55th Cong., 1st sess., reprinted with- 
out map. Annual Report for 1897, p. 1538.) In 1899 and 1900 there 
were dredged under this project 120,000 cubic yards of material. 
The contractor abandoned the work. Dredging was resumed with 
the U. S. seagoing dredge Savannah on November 4, 1905, and dis- 
continued May 31. 1906, on account of exhaustion of available funds. 
A channel 150 feet wide, with a depth of 12 feet at mean low water 
(mean tidal range, 7 feet), had been created by the removal of 130,- 
953 cubic yards of material. No work has been done since. The 
project was virtually abandoned by the river and harbor act of June 
25, 1910, which made an appropriation for Darien Harbor alone, 
although this work had been previously consolidated with that for 
Doboy Bar. The expenditures under this project amounted to 
$49,131.11 for improvement and nothing for maintenance. 

9. ALT AM AHA, OCONEE, AND OCMULGEE RIVERS, GA. 

The improvement of each of these rivers was carried on as a sepa- 
rate work until they were consolidated by the river and harbor act 
of March 2, 1907, which, however, made no alteration in the indi- 
vidual projects. 

ALTAMAHA RIVER. 

The first project for this river was submitted November 27, 1880 
(Annual Report for 1881, p. 1107), and the first appropriation for 
it was made by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1881. This 
project provided for securing a 3-foot channel, not less than 80 feet 
wide, by the excavation of rock shoals, dredging, and the removal of 
snags and other obstructions, at an estimated cost of $60,000. 

Under this project the snag boat Toccoa was built for use on this 
river and the Savannah River, commencing work October 1, 1883. 
Altogether there were removed 2 piles, 936 snags and logs, and 1,819 
overhanging trees. Channels 100 feet wide and 4 feet deep were 
opened through rock shoals at Town Bluff and Piney Bluff, and 
training wall and bank protection were constructed at Beards Bluff. 
With the exception of that done by the snag boat, all work was done 
by contract. There was expended under this project $58,981.19, not 
including $5,795.40 of the appropriation of 1886 allotted to Doboy 
Bar. 

A project for establishing a navigable steamboat channel 3 feet 
deep at ordinary summer low water between the junction of the 
Oconee and Ocmulgee Rivers and the town of Darien, by (1) remov- 
ing rock shoals and sand bars; (2) building deflecting dikes and 
closing incipient cut-offs; (3) removing snags and logs from the 



1816 REPORT OP THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

channel and overhanging trees from the banks of the stream; and 
(4) revetting caving banks, at an estimated cost of $129,000 for 
improvement, and an annual expenditure of from $3,000 to $5,000 
for maintenance, was adopted by the river and harbor act of Sep- 
tember 19, 1890. (H. Doc. No. 283, 51st Cong., 2d sess., reprinted 
Annual Eeport for 1890, p. 1372.) Under this project there were 
removed 3 rock shoals, 10 sand bars, numerous snags, sunken logs, 
stumps, and overhanging trees, and the river was straightened at 
several points by cut-offs. The 10-inch suction dredge Macon was 
constructed for the use of this river and the Oconee and Ocmulgee 
Rivers. The expenditures under this project were $101,037.21 for 
new work and $33,442.39 for maintenance. 

OCONEE RIVER. 

The first appropriation for this river was made by the river and 
harbor act of June 18, 1878, a project having been submitted Jan- 
uary 29, 1875, to secure a low- water channel 3 feet in depth from 
the confluence of the Oconee and Ocmulgee Rivers to Milledgeville, 
by removing rock ledges, shoals, snags, logs, and overhanging trees, 
at an estimated cost of $10,150. (Annual Report for 1875. Part II, 
p. 44.) This estimate was increased to $15,000 in 1878 (Annual 
Report for 1878. p. 768) ; to $50,000 in 1880 (Annual Report for 
1888, p. 1704) ; and in 1888 to $100,000, with $5,000 annually for 
maintenance. (Annual Report for 1888, p. 1171.) Operations 
were carried on at irregular intervals as funds permitted commenc- 
ing in 1878. A small amount of work was done in June, 1888, near 
the mouth of the river. A specific appropriation of $1,500 in the 
river and harbor act of August 5, 1886, for improving the section of 
the river between Skull Shoals and the Georgia Railroad bridge 
was expended so as to give a least depth in that reach of 20 inches 
at extreme low water. In all, there were removed from the river 
2,234 snags and logs, 1,552 overhanging trees, and 487 cubic yards 
of rock. There were also some small brush jetties built. The ex- 
penditures under this project amounted to $44,822.18. 

The river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, adopted a project 
for establishing a navigable steamboat channel 3 feet deep at ordi- 
nary summer low water from Milledgeville to the forks, by remov- 
ing rafts, rock shoals, and sand bars; enlarging portions of the 
river; revetting caving banks; closing incipient cut-offs: removing 
snags and logs from the channel, and overhanging trees from the 
bank of the stream, at an estimated cost of $171,000, with from 
$3,000 to $5,000 for annual maintenance. (H. Doc. No. 211, 51st 
Cong., 1st sess., reprinted without maps or profile in Annual Re- 
port for 1890, p. 1430.) Under this project numerous logs, snags, 
stumps, bowlders, and overhanging trees were removed: several 
threatened cut-offs closed and others opened; 6 training dikes. \ 
spur dam, and 900 feet of shore protection built ; 23 rock shoals and 
several sand shoals removed, all below Milledgeville. 

Under a provision of the river and harbor act of March 3. 1905, 
an isolated navigable section of the river, 17 miles long, extending 
from the Georgia Railroad bridge, 54 miles above Milledgeville. 
to the northern boundary of Greene County, was improved at a cost 



APPENDIX. 1817 

of $3,000, by removing the most troublesome obstructions from the 
channel, and cutting numerous logs and overhanging trees on the 
bank. There was expended on this project for new work $171,596.74 
and for maintenance $37,482.91. 

OCMTJLGEE RIVER. 

The first appropriation for the Ocmulgee River was made by the 
river and harbor act of August 14, 1876, which adopted a project 
for a 4-foot channel 80 feet wide from the forks to Macon at a cost 
estimated at $112,480. (Annual Report for 1S75, Pt. II, p. 671.) 
This channel was to be obtained by the excavation of sand and rock 
shoals and the removal of sunken rafts, snags, logs, overhanging 
trees, and other obstructions. Under this project there were removed 
from the river 7,705 snags and stumps, 13,144 overhanging trees, 
359 cubic yards of rock, and 1,869 cubic yards of earth; 112 logs 
were cut up on the bank, 801 trees were girdled, 2 jetties were built 
at Tillmans Bar, 2 snag dams were built at Ashleys Landing and 1 
at Indian Timber Landing. The expenditures under this project 
were $79,390.73. The work done on the river enabled boats to run 
without accident at a stage 3 feet lower than was possible before 
improvement was begun. 

The river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, adopted a project 
establishing a navigable steamboat channel 3 feet deep at ordinary 
summer low water from the forks to Macon at an estimated cost of 
$210,000 for original work and an annual cost of maintenance of 
from $3,000 to $5,000. (H. Doc. No. 215, 51st Cong., 1st sess., re- 
printed without maps in Annual Report for 1890, p. 1455.) The 
channel was to be obtained by removing rock shoals and sand bars, 
closing incipient cut-offs, revetting caving banks, removing snags 
and logs from the channel and overhanging trees from the banks of 
the stream. 

Under this project there were removed from the channel 27,332 
snags, logs, and stumps, 8 wrecks, and 2 old bridge piers; 1,722 trees 
were girdled and 121,143 overhanging trees, saplings, and logs were 
cut on the banks; 12 spur dikes were built at Tillmans Bar; 3 spur 
dikes aggregating 400 feet in length were built at Macon Bar; 1 spur 
dike was repaired; Atwoods Jetty was extended 155 feet; training 
dikes were built in the vicinity of Macon with an aggregate length 
of 8,089 feet. There was built at McRaes Bar a training dike 1,200 
feet long; at Dents Landing one 460 feet long; at Mobley Bluff one 
1,100 feet long; 1,100 feet of training dike were built at Buzzard 
Bar, 1,950 feet at Davis Reach, 350 feet at Mitchells Bar, 1,350 feet 
at Hollingsworth Ferry, and 757 feet at various other localities ; the 
training dikes at Buzzard Bar, Davis Reach, and Mobley Bluff and 
7,379 feet at other localities were repaired or rebuilt; 7,213 feet of 
bank protection was built in the vicinity of Macon ; 278 feet at Till- 
mans Bar, 1,325 feet at Mansfields Bar, 561 feet at Newtons Place, 
and 506 feet at other localities; 2,250 feet of bank protection was 
rebuilt; Quinn Shoals, a rocky ledge, was partially removed; a clay 
point at Hubbard Shoals was blasted off; 3,149 cubic yards of rock 
were removed from Buttermilk Shoals, 625 from Town Shoals, 
595 cubic yards from Collins Bluff Shoals, 394 from Seven Syca- 



1818 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

more Shoals, 105 from Gradys Shoals, 187 from Ways Shoals; 
3,904 cubic yards of rock and 448 cubic yards of clay were removed 
from Tanyard Shoals; 1,218 cubic yards of rock and 400 cubic yards 
of earth from Taylors Bluff Shoals and 2,287 cubic yards of rock 
and 635 cubic yards of earth from various other localities; the cut- 
offs at Gees Point, Cow Face Bar, and House Creek Suck were 
opened up, there being removed 7:23 snags in tbis work, 852 stumps, 
434 logs, and a large quantity of earth. This project was 95 per cent 
completed at a cost of $301,782.21 for new work and $41,025.02 for 
maintenance. Referred to the datum of the survey of 1889, upon 
which the project was based, the 3-foot channel had been obtained 
from the forks to within 6 miles of Macon; referred to the survey 
of 1009-1011, there was 1.2 miles in this part of the river in which 
the 3-foot channel had not been secured, and 1.3 miles additional 
within 6 miles of Macon, the controlling depth bemg approximately 
2 feet. 

11. BRUNSWICK HARBOR, GA. 

Until they were consolidated by the river and harbor act of June 
13, 1002, the improvement of the bar and of the inner harbor were 
carried on as separate works. 

Inner harbor. — An appropriation of $10,000 made by the river and 
harbor act of July 4, 183G, was used in dredging a channel through 
the shoal at the lower end of East River. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1870, adopted a project sub- 
mitted April 20, 1876 (Annual Report for 1876, p. 486), for establish- 
ing a 15-foot channel 100 feet wide. Two plans of improvement were 
proposed. The first was for a jetty 3,400 feet long to be constructed 
at the hrwer end of East River on the south side of the channel, at an 
estimated cost of $57,000. This was to be supplemented by dredging 
should the shoal prove to be too hard to be removed by the scour 
produced by the jetty. The second plan was for removing the shoal 
by dredging alone, at an estimated cost of $52,500, including capital- 
ized estimated cost of maintenance. In accordance with the instruc- 
tions of Congress these plans and estimates were based on the in- 
formation already on hand and not on a survey. Upon the adoption 
of the project a survey was made and a definite plan adopted. This 
called for contracting the channel at the lower end of Buzzards 
Island to a width of about 1,000 feet by means of 4,300 feet of jetty, 
and for the dredging of 90,000 cubic yards of material in the con- 
tracted channel, at a total estimated cost of $73,187.50. (Annual 
Report for 1880, p. 959.) 

In 1886 a plan for the following additional w T ork was submitted 
(Annual Report for 1886, p. 1113) : 

. (a) A low dam across Turtle River, extending obliquely upstream from the 
upper end of Buzzard Island to the opposite shore of Biythe Island. 

( b ) Short spur jetties in the lower part of East River. 

(c) Dredging in the vicinity of Turtle River Dam to facilitate the entrance 
of a larger amount of water into East River. 

(d) The jetty to be raised to a higher and uniform level. 

(e) Additional dredging on the shoal in the lower part of East River. 

The estimated cost of the entire project was increased to $190,000. 
Subsequent work was carried on in accordance with this plan, except 
that the dam across Turtle River and the spur jetties in East River 



APPENDIX. 1819 

were not built. Under a provision in the river and harbor act of 
June 3, 1896, a 12-1-foot channel was dredged in Academy Creek. 

A report of the district officer of November 26, 1894, recommended 
that the 15-foot channel be maintained by keeping the training wall 
in good condition and by annual dredging, instead of constructing the 
dam across Turtle River and further contraction works. He esti- 
mated the cost of annual maintenance at $15,000. This, like the pre- 
ceding projects, was not formally adopted, but work was carried on 
in accordance with it until the adoption of the project of June 13, 
1902. 

Bar. — The river and harbor act of July 27, 1892, made an appro- 
priation of $10,000 to be paid to a private individual upon his pro- 
curing, by the explosion of dynamite, a 22-foot channel, 100 feet wide 
across the bar at mean high water, on or before November 1, 1892. 
Additional sums of $10,000 were to be paid for each additional foot 
of depth secured up to include 25 feet, two months additional time 
being allowed for each additional foot of depth. An additional 
$10,000 was to be paid for securing a 26-foot channel, 125 feet wide, 
on or before October 1, 1893. Should the 25-foot channel be main- 
tained for two 3'ears there was to be paid a further sum of $25,000, 
and for maintaining the 26-foot channel two years $25,000 additional. 
There was no payment made under this act. 

A special act of March 1, 1893, made similar provisions, the time 
limit for each depth of channel being made November 1, 1893. There 
was no payment made under this act. 

The river and harbor act of August 18, 1894, made an appropria- 
tion of $30,000 to the private individual specified in the river and 
harbor act of July 27, 1892, and in the special act of November 1, 

1893, for the work done by him previously. It also made an appro- 
priation of $30,000 to be paid to him upon his procuring by the ex- 
plosion of dynamite, a 23-foot channel, 100 feet wide across the bar 
at mean high water, on or before November 1, 1895. Additional 
sums were to be paid as follows : For a 24- foot channel, 100 feet wide, 
to be procured on or before January 1, 1897, $40,000; for a 25-foot 
channel, 100 feet wide, to be procured on or before January 1, 1898, 
$50,000 ; and for maintaining the 25-foot channel for a period of two 
years, $25,000. There was paid under this act $30,000. 

The river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, provided that when the 
private individual specified in the river and harbor act of August 18, 

1894. should receive a certificate for a 24-foot channel, he should be 
paid' $30,000 for a 23-foot channel in addition to the $40,000 for the 
24-foot channel. It also provided that he should be paid $30,000 
for procuring a 23-foot channel, 200 feet wide, and $40,000 additional 
for procuring a 24-foot channel, 200 feet wide, the time limit for 
both channels being three years from the date of passage of the act, 
He was paid $100,000 under this act. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, extended to June 3, 
1900, the time limit of the river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, for 
procuring a 24-foot channel, 200 feet wide, and extended to the same 
date the time limit of the river and harbor act of August 18, 1894, 
for procuring a 25-foot channel, 100 feet wide. There was paid 
under this act $90,000. 



1820 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, made an appropriation 
of $20,000 to a private individual for 50 feet excess width obtained 
by him in securing a 21-foot channel, and $25,000 additional for 50 
feet excess width in securing a 25-foot channel under the provisions 
of the river and harbor acts of August 18, 1891, June 3. 1896, and 
March 3, 1899. 

The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, adopted a project pro- 
viding for a channel 21 feet deep at mean low water in Brunswick 
inner harbor, at a cost of $120,000, and for a channel across the outer 
bar 19.3 feet deep at mean low water (26 feet deep at mean high 
water), at a cost of $10,000. The improvement of Academy Creek 
was also provided for. The river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, 
provided for maintaining in Academy Creek a channel of a depth 
equal to the controlling depth on the shoals at the lower end of East 
River, at a cost not to exceed $5,000. 

Under these acts there was dredged throughout the inner harbor a 
channel 21 feet deep at mean low water, and 300 feet wide, and 
across the bar a channel 19.3 feet deep and 400 feet wide, and in 
Academy Creek a channel 18.5 feet deep and with a width ranging 
from 50 to 90 feet. 

There was expended under this project $173,465.18 for new work 
and $19,596.82 for maintenance, a total of $193,062. 

14. FERNANDINA HARBOR, FLA., AND CUMBERLAND SOUND, GA. 

AND FLA. 

Until they were consolidated by the river and harbor act of June 
25, 1910, the improvement of Fernandina Harbor, Fla., and that of 
Cumberland Sound, Ga. and Fla., constituted separate works. 

CUMBERLAND SOUND, GA. AND FLA. 

The river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, adopted a project 
(Annual Report for 1879, p. 792) to secure a low-water channel 20 
to 21 feet deep across the bar at the entrance to the sound by means 
of converging jetties carried out to the 16-foot contour. The dis- 
tance between the outer ends of the jetties was to be from 3,000 to 
3,500 feet. The north jetty was to have a length of a little over 
18,000 feet, and the south jetty a length of a little over 12,000 feet. 
The crests of the jetties were to be at the level of mean low tide, 
except the outer five-eighths of a mile, which was to be carried to the 
level of half tide. The estimated cost of the work was $2,071,023. 

The river and harbor act of July 13, 1892, adopted a revision of 
the project. (Annual Report for 1891, pp. 1565 and 1598.) This 
revision provided for obtaining a channel at least 19 feet deep at 
low water, and fixed 3,900 feet as the width between the outer ends 
of the jetties, which were to be prolonged to deep water from the 
portions already constructed by the shortest lines. The north jetty 
was first to be raised to a height to stop effectually the sand move- 
ment southward. Then the south jetty was to be raised and ex- 
tended as should be found necessary to secure the desired depth over 
the bar. The estimated cost for low jetties was $1,706,500 and for 
high jetties $2,079,500. There was expended on these projects 
$932,500. 



APPENDIX. 1821 

16. INSIDE WATERWAY BETWEEN SAVANNAH, GA., AND 
FERNANDINA, FLA. 

The improvement of Komerly Marsh, Ga., and that of Jekyl Creek, 
Ga., were undertaken as separate works. Upon the adoption in 1892 
of the first project for the inside waterway as a whole, they were 
incorporated in it. In 1905 the improvement of Skidaway Narrows 
was undertaken as a separate work, but was incorporated in the 
present project for the inside waterway when it was adopted in 1912. 

ROMERLY MARSH, GA. 

The river and harbor act of August 7, 1882, adopted a project for 
dredging through Romerly Marsh a 7- foot channel 48 feet wide, con- 
necting Dead Man's Hammock Creek with Wassaw Creek, at an esti- 
mated cost of $38,720. (Route No. 4 of H. Doc. No. 19, 46th Cong., 
3d sess., reprinted without appendices in the Annual Report for 1881, 
p, 1159.) 

Under this project a channel 7 feet deep at mean low water and 50 
feet wide was cut through the marsh and in Wassaw Creek to deep 
water. The total length of continuous cut was 4,117 feet, of which 
3,547 feet was through the marsh. In addition there were dredged 
three shoals in Wassaw Creek aggregating 1,000 feet in length. This 
work required the removal of 211,562 cubic yards of material, of 
which 99,120 cubic yards was dredged by private parties, who re- 
ceived $22,108.77 as reimbursement by appropriations in the river 
and harbor acts of August 5, 1886, and August 11, 1888. There was 
expended in this improvement $47,108.77, of which $5,000 was con- 
tributed by local interests. 

JEKYL CREEK, GA. 

The river and harbor act of August 11, 1888, adopted a project 
(H. Doc. No. 19, 46th Cong., 3d sess., reprinted without appendices 
in the Annual Eeport for 1881, p. 1162), which included the follow- 
ing features : 

(a) A training wall 2,700 feet long on the west side of the channel at the 
month of Jekyl Creek. 

(6) A closure dam 200 feet long in Mud River at its mouth or junction with 
Brunswick River. 

(c) The dredging of a shoal at the mouths of Lathram and Mud Rivers. 

(d) The dredging of a shoal at the mouth of Jekyl Creek. 

The estimated cost of the work was $25,323. 

Appropriations amounting to $24,000 were made for this improve- 
ment and expended on it as a separate work up to July 13, 1892, when 
it became a portion of the project for the inside water route between 
Savannah, Ga., and Fernandina, Fla., adopted on that date. These 
appropriations having been insufficient to complete the work> it was 
continued and finished June 29, 1905, on stibstantially the original 
plan, under appropriations for the inside water route. There were 
expended of these latter funds $35,000, the entire improvement hav- 
ing cost $59,000. The work accomplished was as follows : 

A training wall 2,600 feet long was constructed at the mouth of 
Jekyl Creek. The shoals in the creek and the one at its mouth were 



1822 REPOBT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

dredged, securing a channel 7 feet deep at low water and 90 feet 
wide. There was dredged from the shoal in the creek at various 
times 22,375 cubic yards of material, and from the shoal at the mouth 
40,955 cubic yards, making a total of 63,330 cubic yards. 

INSIDE WATERWAY. 

The first complete project for the inside waterway was adopted bv 
the river and harbor act of July 13, 1S92 (H. Doc. No. 41, 52d Cong., 
1st sess., reprinted in the Annual Report for 1892, p. 1309). It pro- 
vided for the establishment of a channel 7 feet deep at mean low 
water, from Savannah, Ga., to Fernandina, Fla.. to be accomplished 
by the improvement of Romerly Marsh, Mud River, Little Mud River, 
and Jekyl Creek, by means of dredging and the construction of 
closure dams and training walls of brush mattresses loaded with rip- 
rap stone. The estimated cost of the improvement was $105,000, pro- 
vided that the entire sum were made available at one time. 

The first work done under this project was a continuation of the 
improvement at Jekyl Creek, which had been begun as a separate 
work prior to the adoption of this project. This work, which con- 
sisted in the finishing of the training wall at the mouth of the creek, 
and in dredging, was completed June 29, 1905, substantially in ac- 
cordance with the original plan. In 1897 an 8-foot channel 45 feet 
wide was redredged through the shoal at the mouth of this creek, and 
a 7-foot channel, from 40 to 90 feet wide, was dredged through the 
shoals in Big Mud Rh r er. Subsequently shoals were dredged at 
Skidaway Narrows, Florida Passage Dividings, New Tea Kettle 
River, Little Mud River, Frederica River, and Cumberland Divid- 
ings. At all of these localities redredging was necessary one or more 
times. A training wall 2,000 feet long, with its crest at the level of 
mean tide, was constructed and maintained in Jekyl Creek, about a 
mile from its mouth. A small dam was built in Little Mud River 
near its outlet into Brunswick River. There was expended under this 
project $68,388.19 for new work and $134,770.21 for maintenance, a 
total of $204,164.40. 

SKIDAWAY NARROWS, GA. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, adopted a project for a 
channel 6 feet deep at mean low water, 75 feet wide, in Skidaway 
Narrows and the connecting portions of Skidaway River and Burn- 
side River. This was to be accomplished by dredging and the con- 
struction of 3 cut-off dikes at an estimated cost of $55,000. This 
formed an alternate route of the inside waterway, the regular one 
being via Romerly Marsh and Habersham Creek. 

Under this project a 6-foot channel, with a bottom width of 75 feet 
in the straight portions and increased in the bends, was dredged from 
deep water in the Skidaway River to deep water in the Burnside 
River. Work was begun October 23, 1905, and the project was com- 
pleted November 20,^1908, 341,211 cubic yards of material having 
been dredged. There was expended under the project $55,000 for 
improvement and nothing for maintenance. 



APPENDIX. 1823 

HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE JACKSONVILLE, 
FLA., DISTRICT. 



1. CHANNEL BETWEEN ST. JOHNS RIVER AND CUMBERLAND SOUND, 
GA. AND FLA. 

The first project for the improvement of this waterway was 
adopted by Congress in the river and harbor act of May 23, 1828, 
which appropriated $13,500 " for deepening the inland passage, or 
present channel, for navigation between the St. Johns River in 
Florida and St. Marys Harbor in Georgia." Between 1828 and 1838 
appropriations aggregating $78,000 were made and expended chiefly 
in dredging Kingsleys Cut, connecting Amelia River with South 
Amelia River, and Gunnisons Cut, connecting Sawpit Creek with 
Sisters Creek and Fort George River. 

By the river and harbor act of June 23, 1874, $10,000 was author- 
ized to be expended " for dredging out the inside passage between the 
St. Johns and Nassau Inlet." A survey was made and report sub- 
mitted under date of June 14, 1875, which is printed in the Annual 
Report of the Chief of Enginers for the fiscal year ending June 30, 
1875, Part II, pages 48-59. A channel 80 feet wide by 11 feet deep 
at high water, at an estimated cost of $160,000, was recommended. 
Appropriations aggregating $24,000, made from 1874 to 1880, were 
applied to this work. The total expended was $19,565.55. Owing 
to changes in transportation conditions and the adoption of the 
project for improving the entrance to the St. Johns River, which 
reduced the importance of this improvement, the work was aban- 
doned December 1, 1880, and the unexpended balance was returned 
to the Treasury. A channel 4 feet deep and 40 feet wide was dredged 
through the shoals betwen the St. Johns River and Nassau Sound, but 
ii soon shoaled to 2| feet, in which condition it remained until the 
adoption of the present project. 

2. ST. JOHNS RIVER, FLA., JACKSONVILLE TO THE OCEAN. 

The first appropriation for this river was $10,000, made by the 
river and harbor act of August 30, 1852. A survey of the river from 
the bar to Jacksonville was made by a Coast Survey party and a con- 
tract was made for maintaining for a time a depth of water over the 
bar sufficient for the vessels engaged in the trade, but no material im- 
provement was effected. A total of $9,172.83 was expended, and the 
balance of the appropriation was returned to the Treasury. Between 
1870 and 1878 appropriations aggregating $60,000 were made and 
expended in survej^s and tentative annual dredging on the bar, with 
a view to maintaining a practicable 10-foot channel. No permanent 
results were obtained. 

The first project for the permanent improvement of the bar was 
adopted by the river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, and was based 
on report of June 30, 1879, printed in the Annual Report of the 
Chief of Engineer? for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1879, pages 
767-792. This project contemplated a channel over the bar, 15 feet 
deep at mean low water, to be obtained by building two converging 



1824 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

jetties' to the 16-foot curve beyond the bar and by dredging and 
raking between the jetties. The north jetty was to be 9,400 feet long 
and the south jetty 6,800 feet, and the width between the jetties at 
the bar was to be 1,600 feet. The jetties were to be built of stone on 
a mattress foundation. The estimated cost of the work was $1,306,- 
409. Deepening of the shoalest places in the river between the mouth 
and Jacksonville, at an additional estimated cost of $120,000, was 
also recommended. This project, so far as the work at the mouth was 
concerned, was practically completed in 1896, at a total expenditure 
of $1,417,000. Nothing was done in the river above the mouth, except 
surveys and oreparation of plans for work at and below Dames 
Point. 

A project for securing 15 feet through the defective reach from 
Dames Point to Mile Point Avas approved by the Chief of Engineers 
on June 11, 1891, and was recognized by the river and harbor act of 
July 13, 1892. A modification of this project providing for dredging, 
dikes, and shore protection to secure a depth of 18 feet at mean low- 
water and a width of 200 feet, was approved by the Secretarv of War 
March 28, 1892. The estimated cost of the work was $324,201. This 
project was carried through to completion by Duval County, under 
the supervision of the War Department. It was completed in 1894, 
at a total cost of $303,206.25, provided by Duval County. 

The third project, adopted by the river and harbor act of June 3. 
1896, was based on plans and estimates printed in House Document 
No. 346, Fifty-third Congress, third session. The project contem- 
plated a channel from Jacksonville to the ocean 300 feet wide and 
24 feet deep at mean low water, to be secured by dredging and con- 
struction of mattress and stone training dikes in the river and by ex- 
tending the north and south jetties 1,500 feet and 500 feet, respec- 
tively, and raising both to mean high water throughout their length, 
all at an estimated cost of $2,109,750. This project was practically 
completed in 1911, at a total expenditure of $2,577,363.08, of which 
$2,033,964.56 was for original work and $543,398.52 was for main- 
tenance. The project was practically completed for $75,785.44 less 
than the original estimate. 

5. ST. JOHNS RIVER, FLA., PALATKA TO LAKE HARNEY. 

The first provision for the improvement in this stretch of river 
was made by Congress in the river and harbor act of July 14. 1880, 
under the title of " Improving Volusia Bar, Fla.." and is based on 
report printed in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 
the fiscal year ending June 30, 1879, pages 795-798. The project 
provided for the improvement of Volusia Bar. at the head of Lake 
George (43.2 miles above Palatka), by building two jetties on the 
bar, carried out to 5^ or 6 feet of water, with their ends 200 to 250 
feet apart, with a view to obtaining a permanent channel about 6 
feet deep. The estimated cost of the work proposed was $15,000. 
In 1883 the estimate was increased to $21,100, to provide for extend- 
ing and raising the jetties and supplementing their effect by dredg- 
ing; and in 1884 the estimate was again increased to $25,000. The 
work proposed was completed in May, 1887. at a cost of $2 t.287.43 
for construction. Two jetties were built, 3,400 and 2,200 feet long, and 
the depth on the bar was increased to 5 feet, and it was decided not 



APPENDIX. 1825 

to attempt to obtain a greater depth, as 5 feet was sufficient for the 
navigation then existing. Between 1887 and 1902 the sum of 
$6,712.57 was spent in repairs and maintenance of this work. 

A second project for improvement in this stretch was inaugurated 
by Congress in the river and harbor act of July 5, 1881, which 
appropriated $5,000 for the improvement of the river between Lake 
George and Lake Monroe, a distance of 46 miles. A plan of improve- 
ment was submitted and approved, contemplating cut-offs 100 feet 
wide and 6 feet deep at four of the worst bends in the stretch. This 
plan is printed in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 
the fiscal year ending June 30, 1884, pages 1137-1142. The esti- 
mated cost of all the work proposed was $38,800. On April 2, 1892, 
the plan was modified to provide for easing the worst points at the 
bends instead of making cut-offs. This work was completed on 
October 14, 1893, at three of the bends, the fourth being left until 
funds for making a cut-off should be provided. The amount ex- 
pended was $4,695.71, and the balance of the appropriation, $304.29, 
reverted to the surplus fund in June, 1896. 

The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, appropriated $2,000 for 
maintenance of improvement at Volusia Bar, with the proviso that 
so much of this amoimt as may be necessary may be expended upon 
the St. Johns River between Volusia Bar (Lake George) and Lake 
Monroe, thus combining the previous projects. Thereafter dredging 
and snagging were done on the stretch from Lake George to Lake 
Monroe and the jetties at Volusia Bar kept in repair, maintaining 
a channel with a least depth of 5 feet at low water between Palatka 
and Sanford. The sum of $19,838 was expended in this work before 
the adoption of the present project. 

7. OKLAWAHA RIVER, FLA. 

The first provision for the improvement of this river was made by 
an act of Congress approved February 24, 1835, Which appropriated 
$10,000 " for clearing out the Ochlawaha River from the St. Johns 
to Glassalls Spring, near Camp King, for the transportation of 
provisions and military stores to the garrison at that place, as esti- 
mated in the report of the Quartermaster General." Under this 
provision of law the sum of $3,911.95 was expended in 1835, and 
the balance of the appropriation was subsequently returned to the 
Treasury. 

8. INDIAN RIVER, FLA. 

The first project for improvement of Indian River was adopted by 
an act of June 15, 1844, which appropriated $1,500 for connecting 
Indian River with Mosquito Lagoon at the Haulover, thus opening 
the water route down the coast. A second appropriation of $5,000 
was made for the same purpose in the river and harbor act of August 
30, 1852. A total of $4,994.94 was expended in this work in 1853 and 
1854, resulting in a cut 8 feet wide, with a depth of water of 2 feet. 

The river and harbor act of August 18, 1894, made provision for 
dredging channel from the channel of the Indian River through the 
Negro Cut to the bar at the Indian River Inlet ; and the river and 
harbor act of March 3, 1899, authorized the construction of a training 
wall for the protection of the dredged channel. This project was 
8373°— eng 1915 115 



1826 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

based on report printed in Senate Document No. 3, Fifty-third Con- 
gress, second session, also in Annual Report for 1894, pages 1227-1230, 
which contemplated a channel 6 feet deep at mean low water and 100 
feet wide. The estimated cost of the work, including dredging and 
the construction of a training wall to protect the dredged cut, was 
$32,775. The project was practically completed in January, 1902, 
at a cost of $32,500, which was $275 less than the estimate. 

The deficiency act of February 26, 189G, made provision for open- 
ing Jupiter Inlet for the passage of boats and small vessels. A cut 
40 feet wide and 2 feet deep at low water was made in September, 
1896, at a cost of $500. In 1900 the inlet closed. It was reopened in 
1901, at a cost of $1,000. The total expenditure on Jupiter Inlet was 
$1,500. 

10. HARBOR AT MIAMI (BISCAYNB BAY), FLA. 

The first appropriation for Biscayne Bay was made in the river 
and harbor act of March 3, 1899, which provided for the appoint- 
ment of a board of engineers to examine the three routes from Miami 
to the sea with reference to the most feasible route and the cost of 
providing a channel 18 feet deep and of suitable width and the de- 
sirability of the improvement. The report of the board was sub- 
mitted April 9, 1900, and is printed in House Document No. 662, 
Fifty-sixth Congress, first session. The sum of $4,965.51 was ex- 
pended in this work. 

The first project for the improvement of the bay was adopted by 
Congress in the river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, and was based 
on the report of the board of engineers printed in House Document 
No. 662, Fifty-sixth Congress, first session. The sum of $300,000 
was appropriated and authorized for the improvement, with a view- 
to obtaining a channel 18 feet deep from the wharves at Miami to 
the sea by way of a line entering the sea through a new cut about 
4,000 feet north of.Norris Cut, as described in the report printed in 
the document, and a basin of the same depth, 1,600 feet long, and 500 
feet wide, adjacent to the wharves at Miami. The act provided that 
the Florida East Coast Railway Co. should construct at its own ex- 
pense the basin adjacent to the wharves at Miami, and the channel 
across the bay to the east side of the refuge basin proposed in the 
report of the board, this channel to be not less than 85 nor more than 
100 feet in width, as the Secretary of War might determine, and the 
channel and the basin to be open to the free and unobstructed use of 
the public. The work to be done by the United States with the funds 
appropriated and authorized was limited to constructing and pro- 
tecting the portion of the channel extending to the sea from the 
terminus of the channel to be constructed by the railway company, 
of such approximately uniform depth and of such width as would 
best serve the interests of navigation and as could be constructed with 
the funds appropriated and authorized. The act provided further 
that before any part of the appropriation should be expended the 
said railway company should enter into a contract with the United 
States for the performing of its part of the work, and for securing 
in its portion of the channel and in the basin adjacent to the wharves 
practicable depths at least as great as are secured in the portion of 
the channel to be built by the United States, and for maintaining for 



APPENDIX. 1827 

a period of three years, after the 18-foot channel to be constructed 
by the Government shall have been obtained, an equal depth in the 
basin and the channel across the bay. The contract was also re- 
quired to contain certain provisions for the use of the railway 
wharves and ether facilities by all shippers at reasonable rates and 
on just and reasonable conditions. 

The project adopted by Congress, as above described, formed only 
a part of the plan prepared by the board of engineers, which con- 
templated an entrance channel 300 feet wide and 18 feet deep, in- 
creasing seaward to 20 feet, and protected by one or two jetties, as 
might be found necessary; a channel inside the entrance 200 feet 
Avide and 18 feet deep leading to a refuge basin 1,200 feet long and 
400 feet wide located at some convenient point near the entrance; 
and a channel 150 feet wide across the bay. The estimated cost of 
this work was $1,493,743, or $900,000 if the channel across the bay 
were omitted. 

The project adopted in the act of June 13, 1902, was modified by 
Congress in the river and harbor act of March 2, 1907, which pro- 
vided for dredging the Government's portion of the channel to a 
width of 100 feet and for constructing the north jetty. The sum of 
$246,000 additional was appropriated and authorized, thus increasing 
the amount allowed for the work to $546,000. 

Under this project and its modifications two jetties were built and 
the entrance channel dredged through the rock and sand 18 to 20 
feet deep and 110 feet wide for 2,410 feet and 85 feet wide for the 
rest of its length. The dredged channel rapidly shoaled to a limiting 
depth of 7 or 8 feet. Work ceased in August, 1911. The total ex- 
penditure under the project was $560,436.60, of which $548,483.27 
was for original work and $11,953.33 was for maintenance. 

11. HARBOR AT KEY WEST, FLA. 

The improvement of the entrance to the harbor at Key West was 
inaugurated by Congress in the river and harbor act of August 2, 
1882, which appropriated $25,000 for " Improving Key West Harbor, 
especially the Northwest Entrance." The improvement contemplated 
was that proposed in report of examination of harbor of Key West, 
Fla., printed in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for the 
fiscal year ending June 30, 1882, pages 1314-1315. The project pro- 
vided for deepening the Northwest Entrance to 17. feet, the cut to be 
300 feet wide, and the improvement to be effected by dredging, at an 
estimated cost of $140,000. Under this project $25,000 was expended 
in 1883 in dredging a cut 60 feet wide and 15 feet deep through the 
bar, but this cut was not permanent. By 1885 it had shoaled to the 
general depth of 11 feet. In the river and harbor act of August 5, 
1886, $2,500 was appropriated for an examination and survey of the 
entrance. The entire appropriation was expended for this purpose, 
and a project for the improvement of the entrance was prepared, 
which contemplated the formation and maintenance of a channel 17 
feet deep at mean low water, b}^ means of a dike along its western 
side, the removal of a ledge of rock, and dredging, at an estimated 
cost of $607,600. (Annual Report for 1887, pp. 1221-1234.) 



1828 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 
13. CALOOSAHATCHEE RIVER, FLA. 

The first project for the improvement of this river was inaugu- 
rated by Congress in the river and harbor act of August 2, L882, and 
was based on plans and estimates presented in a rep it of examina- 
tion of the river printed in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engi- 
neers for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1879, pages 863-870. The 
project contemplated a channel 7 feet deep at ordinary low water and 
100 feet wide from the mouth to Fort Myers (11 miles), to be secured 
by dredging, at an estimated cost of $19,962. This project was com- 
pleted in August, 1885, at a total cost of $9,156.59, which was 
$10,505.11 less than the original estimate. 

A modification of this project was approved by the Chief of En- 
gineers in April, 1887. This modification provided for the expendi- 
ture of $2,000 in making a thorough survey of the river and for the 
removal of snags and overhanging trees between Fort Myers and 
Fort Thompson, with a view to making the river navigable as far 
as Fort Thompson for boats drawing 1 feet. On September 15, 
1888, a further modification of the project was approved, providing 
for dredging a channel 1 feet deep through the shoal at Beautiful 
Island (2 miles above Fort Myers) and the building of a training 
wall to protect the dredged cut. The contemplated expenditure in 
the work proposed was about $15,600. The modified project was 
recognized by Congress in the river and harbor acts of August 11, 
1888, September 19, 1890, and June 13, 1902, by which funds were 
appropriated for completing and maintaining the improvement of the 
upper river. The project, as modified, was completed February ]1, 
1891, at a total cost of $17,993.17. The cost of maintenance was then 
estimated at $1,000 per annum. 

15. CHARLOTTE HARBOR, FLA. 

The improvement of this harbor was inaugurated by Congress in 
the river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, which appropriated 
$35,000 for improving, dredging, and deepening the channel of 
Charlotte Harbor and Pease Creek to the Florida Southern Railroad 
pier at Punta Gorda. A project for the expenditure of this ap- 
propriation in dredging a continuous 12-foot channel to the wharf 
at Punta Gorda. of such width as could be dredged with the funds 
available, was approved by the Chief of Engineers October 23. L890. 
In 1891 an extension of this project was approved by the War De- 
partment, based on report of survej^ printed in Annual Report of the 
Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1891, pages 
1616-1651. This project contemplated securing a channel 200 feet 
wide and 12 feet deep at mean low water from the Gulf of Mexico 
to the railroad wharf at Punta Gorda, at an estimated cost of 
$127,500, the improvement to be effected by dredging through ob- 
structing shoals in the harbor. In 1896 the estimate of cost was 
reduced to $100,000, and in 1897 the dredging was extended 1,600 
feet to the new wharf of the Plant railway system (now the At- 
lantic Coast Line Railroad). This project was reported as practi- 
cally completed December 23. 1899, at a' total cost of $100,000. The 
channel was made 12 feet deep throughout and 200 feet wide, ex- 



APPENDIX. 1829 

cept for the upper portion near the wharves, where the width was 
160 feet and 120 feet, which appeared to be sufficient for the needs 
of commerce. 

17. MANATEE RIVER, FLA. 

The improvement of this river was inaugurated by the river and 
harbor act of August 2, 1882, and was based on report of examina- 
tion printed in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for the 
fiscal year ending June 30, 1882, page 1319. This project contem- 
plated a channel 100 feet wide and 13 feet deep from Tampa Bay 
to Shaws Point and thence to McNeills Point, a distance of 4 miles, 
to be obtained by dredging. The estimated cost was $70,000. In 
1886 this project was modified by authority of the Secretary of War 
(Dec. 15, 1886) to provide for a channel 90 feet wide and 8 feet deep 
at mean low water from Tampa Bay to Rocky Bluff, a distance of 
11 miles, and in 1887 this was changed to provide for a channel 100 
feet wide and 8 feet deep from the bay to Manatee, a distance of 
about 8 miles. The work required by the latter modification was 
completed in 1889, with an expenditure of about $34,000, and in 1892, 
by authority of the Secretary of War (Aug. 13, 1892), the original 
project was resumed, the cost of completion being then estimated at 
$39,000. 

By the river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, provision was made 
for a cut-off from the lower part of the river into Terra Ceia Bay. 
On June 23, 1897, a project for this cut-off was approved by the 
Secretary of War, providing for obtaining, by dredging, a channel 
100 feet wide and 6 feet deep at mean low water from Manatee River 
to Terra Ceia Bay, at an estimated cost of $20,000. This cut-off 
was completed April 30, 1900, at a total actual cost of $13,342. 

18. TAMPA BAY, FLA. 

The first project for the improvement of Tampa Bay was adopted 
by Congress in the river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, which con- 
tained an appropriation for " deepening the bar and channel from 
the bar to the town of Tampa." The improvement contemplated was 
the project outlined in report of examination of Tampa Bay and the 
mouth of Hillsboro River, dated August 25, 1879, and printed in the 
Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year ending 
June 30, 1879, pages 870-873. This project provided for deepening 
the existing channel from deep water in the bay to Tampa, by dredg- 
ing to 9 feet, making the channel 200 feet wide in the river and 150 
feet wide in the bay, at an estimated cost of $97,002. All the work 
proposed was in what is now called Hillsboro Bay and in the mouth 
of the Hillsboro River, ample depths for the navigation then exist- 
ing being found over the bar at the entrance and through Tampa 
Bay proper. 

This project was modified by Congress in the river and harbor act 
of August 11, 1888, which provided for the improvement of the bay 
from the outer bar to Mangrove or Bushy Point. The improvement 
contemplated was that recommended by Capt. W. M. Black, Corps 
of Engineers, in his annual report for 1888 (Annual Report of Chief 
of Engineers for 1888, p. 1114). This project provided for limiting 



1830 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

the depth in the channel to the city of Tampa to the depth of 8 feet, 
already attained, and for connecting the deep water of Old Tampa 
Bay and Tampa Bay by dredging a cut 200 feet wide and 20 feet 
deep at low water through the shoals below Mangrove Point, at an 
estimated cost of $G3,000, making a channel not less than 20 feet deep 
at mean low water and not less than 200 feet wide from the Gulf of 
Mexico to Port Tampa, the terminus of the South Florida Railway 
(now the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad) on Old Tampa Bay. 

Between 1880 and 1892 a total of $130,000 was appropriated for 
work under this project and its modification. The work in Old 
Tampa Bay contemplated by the modified project was completed in 
May, 1892, at a cost of $50,000, which was $13,000 less than the 
original estimate. The rest of the $130,000 appropriated was ex- 
pended in Hillsboro Bay under the original project. 

20. HILLSBORO BAY, FLA. 

The improvement of Hillsboro Bay was inaugurated by Congress 
in the river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, which appropriated 
$10,000 for improving Tampa Bay by " deepening the bar and chan- 
nel from the bar to the town of Tampa." The improvement contem- 
plated was that proposed in report of examination of Tampa Bay 
and the mouth of Hillsboro River, dated August 25, 1879, and printed 
in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year 
ending June 30, 1879, pages 870-873. This project provided for 
deepening the existing channel from deep water in the bay to Tampa 
by dredging to 9 feet, making the channel 200 feet wide in the river 
and 150 feet wide in the bay, at an estimated cost of $97,002. All 
the work proposed was in what is now called Hillsboro Ba}' and in 
the mouth of the Hillsboro River, ample natural depths for the navi- 
gation then existing being found on the bar and in Tampa Bay 
proper. In 1888. upon the recommendation of Capt. W. M. Black, 
Corps of Engineers, in his annual report for 1888 (Annual Report 
of the Chief of Engineers for 1888, p. 1114) this project was modi- 
fied by limiting the depth in the channel in Hillsboro Bay and the 
mouth of the Hillsboro River to 8 feet, the depth already obtained. 
Work on this project, as modified, was suspended in June, 1893, after 
an expenditure of $S0,000, appropriated under the title of " Improv- 
ing Tampa Bay " and " Improving harbor at Tampa Bay." When 
work on this project ceased the channel was 200 feet wide in the 
river and from 75 to 100 feet wide in the bay, and from 8 to 9 feet 
deep throughout. 

A second project was adopted by Congress in the river and harbor 
act of March 3, 1899, and was based on plans and estimates printed 
in House Document No. 545, Fifty-fifth Congress, second session. 
This project contemplated securing a channel 12 feet dee]) at mean 
low water in Hillsboro River, from a point about 100 feet south of 
the Lafayette Street Bridge to the mouth of the river, and thence 
along the line of shortest distance to the 12-foot contour in Hills- 
boro Bay, the width to be 200 feet in the river and 150 feet in the 
bay, at an estimated cost of $300,000 for construction and $1,000 
annually for maintenance, the improvement to be effected by dredg- 
ing in the bay and dredging and rock excavation in the river. This 
project, which included work in the Hillsboro River as well as in 



APPENDIX. 1831 

the bay, was practically completed in 1905, when it became merged in 
.the third project adopted that year. A total of $275,000 was ex- 
pended under this project, all of which was for original work. The 
result was a channel 12 feet deep at mean low water from the 12-foot 
contour in the bay to a point 100 feet south of the Lafayette Street 
Bridge, the width being 200 feet in the river and 150 feet in the bay, 
except for a short distance where the width was but 110 feet. Of the 
total expenditure under this project $96,832.91 was expended in 
Hillsboro River. 

A third project, for obtaining a depth of 20 feet from the lower 
bay to the mouth of Hillsboro River, was adopted by Congress in 
the river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, and was based on plans 
and estimates printed in House Document No. 306, Fifty-eighth Con- 
gress, second session. This project, provided for a channel 20 feet 
deep at mean low water and 150 feet wide from the lower bay to the 
mouth of the Hillsboro River, with a turning basin 1,050 feet long 
and 450 feet wide at the inner end of the channel. The estimated 
cost was $448,350. The improvement was to be effected by dredging. 
This project was completed February 29, 1908, except for a small 
area in the northwestern end of the turning basin, where ledge rock 
was found, over which a least depth of 16.8 feet at mean low water 
was attained. The total expenditure under this project was $465,- 
157.70, of which $448,050.46 was for original work and $17,107.24 
was for maintenance after completion. 

21. HILLSBORO RIVER, FLA. 

The improvement of Hillsboro River was inaugurated by Congress 
in the river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, which appropriated 
$10,000 for improving Tampa Bay by " deepening the bar and chan- 
nel from the bar to the town of Tampa." The improvement contem- 
plated was that proposed in report of examination of Tampa Bay 
and the mouth of Hillsboro River, dated August 25, 1879, and 
printed in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal 
year ending June 30, 1879, pages 870-873. This project provided 
for deepening the existing channel from deep water in the bay to 
Tampa by dredging to 9 feet, making the channel 200 feet wide in 
the river and 150 feet wide in the bay, at an estimated cost of 
$97,002. All the work proposed was in what is now called Hillsboro 
Bay and in the mouth of the Hillsboro River, ample natural depths 
for the navigation then existing being found on the bar and in Tampa 
Bay proper. In 1888, upon the recommendation of Capt. W. M. 
Black, Corps of Engineers, in his annual report for 1888 (Annual 
Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1888, p. 1114) this project was 
modified by limiting the depth in the channel in Hillsboro Bay and 
the mouth of the Hillsboro River to 8 feet, the depth already ob- 
tained. Work on this project, as modified, was suspended in June, 
1893, after an expenditure of $80,000, appropriated under the title 
of "Improving Tampa Bay," and "Improving harbor at Tampa 
Bay." When work on this project ceased, the channel was 200 feet 
wide in the river and from 75 to 100 feet wide in the bay and from 
8 to 9 feet deep throughout. 

The second project was adopted by Congress in the river and har- 
bor act of March 3, 1899, and was based on plans and estimates 



1832 EEPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

printed in House Document No. 545, Fifty- fifth Congress, second 
session. This project contemplated securing a channel 12 feet deep 
at mean low water in Hillsboro River from a point about 100 feet 
south of the Lafayette Street Bridge to the mouth of the river, and 
thence along the line of shortest distance to the 12-foot contour in 
Hillsboro Bay, the width to be 200 feet in the river, and 150 feet in 
the bay, at an estimated cost of $300,000 for construction and $1,000 
annually for maintenance, the improvement to be effected by dredg- 
ing in the bay and dredging and rock excavation in the river. All 
work in the Hillsboro River contemplated by this project, which 
forms the basis of the present project for the Hillsboro River, was 
completed in March, 1905. The expenditure on this work is included 
in the expenditure reported under the head of Hillsboro Bay, the 
appropriations having been made under that title. The amount 
expended in the river under this project was $96,832.91. 

25. WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER, FLA. 

The first project for the improvement of this river was inaugu- 
rated by Congress in the river and harbor act of March 3, 1881, and 
was based on report dated March 6, 1880, of an examination of the 
river from its mouth to Hayes Ferry, printed in Annual Report of 
the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1880, 
pages 1110-1119. This project contemplated the removal of snags, 
overhanging trees, and loose rock and cutting through some of the 
worst shoals in the river and the bar at the mouth, with a view to 
making it possible for boats drawing 2 feet of water to navigate 
the river as far up as Hayes Ferry (79 miles) — extended in 1886 
to Pembertons Ferry (85 miles) — during about one-half the year. 
The estimated cost of the work was $23,900. The project was prac- 
tically completed November 14, 1892. The total expenditure was 
$24,403.62. The river and harbor act of June 25, 1910, provided for 
maintenance to Pembertons Ferry, and this old project may, there- 
fore, be regarded as continued in force, except where superseded by 
later projects. 

A project for deepening the channel at the entrance was adopted 
by the river and harbor act of June 13, 1902. This project provided 
for deepening the channel, previously dredged by private interests, 
from the mouth of the river to the loading pool in the Gulf of Mex- 
ico, a distance of 11,780 feet, to a depth of 8 feet, for straightening 
the channel, and for its maintenance. This project was practically 
completed in 1906 at an expenditure of $30,000, a channel with a 
least width of 60 feet and a least depth of 7.8 feet at low water being 
secured. 

26. SUWANNEE RIVER, FLA. 

The first provision for the improvement of this river was made by 
an act approved March 3. 1839, which appropriated $15,000 " for the 
removal of obstructions at the month of the Suwannee River and for 
the survey of said river with a view to its improvement." With these 
funds an accurate survey of the mouth of the river was made, and a 
report w T as submitted May 15, 1841, outlining a plan of improvement. 
The sum of $10,ir>4.02 was expended in this work, and the balance 
of the appropriation, being considered insufficient to accomplish any 
useful improvement, was returned to the Treasury in 1811. 



APPENDIX. 1833 

HISTOKICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE MONTGOMERY 
(ALA.) DISTRICT. 



1. CARRABELLE BAR AND HARBOR, FLA. 

The river and harbor act of August 5, 1886, provided that $2,000 of 
an appropriation made for Apalachicola Bay might be expended on 
Carrabelle (or Crooked) River. This was expended in 18S7 in 
dredging a channel 1,601 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 8 feet deep at 
the mouth of the river. The river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, 
"appropriated $10,000 to be used in securing a 10-foot channel from 
the mouth of Carrabelle River to the channel in the bay. (H. Doc. No. 
328, 53d Cong., 3d sess.; Annual Report for 1895, p. 1680.) Under 
the provisions of this act a channel about 10,000 feet long and 53 feet 
wide was constructed, but still did not provide the project depth up 
to the city. A second appropriation of $10,000 was provided by the 
act of March 3, 1899, for continuing this improvement, and the work 
was continued until a channel with a depth of 8 feet and a width of 
80 feet was obtained, the total expenditures being $21,704.08. A 
project for obtaining by dredging a channel 10 feet deep and 100 feet 
wide from Dog Island anchorage to the town of Carrabelle, at an 
estimated cost of $47,300, was adopted bv the river and harbor act of 
June 13, 1902 (H. Doc. No. 227, 56th Cong., 2d sess.; Annual Report 
for 1901, p. 1800), which project was partially completed and re- 
mained in force until the present project was adopted. The expendi- 
tures upon the modified project were $28,554.75. 

2. APALACHICOLA BAY, FLA. 

The river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, adopted a project (Ex. 
Doc. No. 241, 42d Cong., 2d sess.; Annual Report for 1872, p. 612) 
for securing a channel 100 feet wide and 11 feet deep across the shoal 
at the mouth of Apalachicola River by dredging, at an estimated 
cost of $100,000, and subsequent acts down to and including that of 
June 3, 1896, made appropriations to carry out the project, the sum 
of $154,000 being expended. The act of August 5, 1886, however, 
provided that $2,000 of the sum appropriated by that act should be 
expended at Carrabelle. (Annual Report for 1887, p. 1265, and 1888, 
p. 1161.) In 1890 it was reported that Bulkhead Shoal, separating 
Apalachicola Bay and St. Georges Sound, had become the most seri- 
ous obstruction to the commerce of Apalachicola Bay, and it was 
recommended that a channel not less than 9 feet deep and not to 
exceed 100 feet wide be dredged through that shoal. This recom- 
mendation was approved by the Chief of Engineers May 20, 1891, 
and the work was carried out in the following year, the cost of this 
work being included in the sum given above. The river and harbor 
act of March 3, 1899, adopted a project for obtaining a channel 18 
feet deep and 100 feet wide from the Gulf of Mexico to the town of 
Apalachicola. (H. Doc. No. 129, 54th Cong., 2d sess. ; Annual Report 
for 1897, p. 1655.) The estimate of the cost of the work was placed 
at $350,000 for the proposed improvement and $20,000 to $30,000 
annually for maintenance. This project continued in force until 



1834 REPORT OP THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

1907, when it was superseded by the present project. The expendi- 
tures on this modification were $130,679.26. 

6. CHATTAHOOCHEE RIVER, GA. AND ALA. 
BELOW COLUMBUS, GA. 

The river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, directed an exam- 
ination and survey of the Chattahoochee River, Ga. and Ala., be- 
tween West Point and Franklin, Ga. (H. Doc. No. 134, 51st Cong., 
2d sess., and Annual Report for 1891, p. 1756.) Although the district 
officer's report was favorable to the improvement it was disapproved 
by the division engineer and the Chief of Engineers. The district 
officer's opinion was that the cost of the work, which would include 
one lock and dam, would be about $100,000. Congress adopted 
the project by making an appropriation of $5,000 in the act of July 
13, 1892, and appropriations were continued on this section of the 
river from 1892 to 1899. The act of March 3, 1899, directed that a 
survey be made of that portion of the river between West Point and 
Franklin to determine the desirability of continuing the improvement. 
(H. Doc. No. Ill, 56th Cong., 2d sess., and Annual Report for 1901, 
p. 1793.) The report was unfavorable to the continuation of the 
improvement of this portion of the river, and it was abandoned pur- 
suant thereto. 

9. CHOCTAWHATCHEE RIVER, FLA. AND ALA. 

An act of Congress approved March 2, 1833, made an appropria- 
tion for the improvement of this stream as recommended by the Post- 
master General. There is no record of the results obtained in this 
improvement, however. The river and harbor act of June 15, 1844, 
also made an appropriation for improving the Choctawhatchee and 
Holmes Rivers, of which no record of results obtained exists in this 
office. Of these appropriations $12,876.62 were expended in this 
stream. The river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, adopted a project 
(Annual Report for 1880, p. 1081) for the improvement of the river 
between Geneva and Newton, Ala., by the construction of three timber 
locks to cover the section of the river immediately below Newton, 
Ala., estimated to cost $45,000, and provided for snagging, etc., from 
Newton to Geneva, Ala., all at an estimated cost of $78,500. The 
locks were never constructed. Snagging and other work were carried 
on at a cost of $24,373.86 prior to the adoption of the present project. 

12. BLACKWATER RIVER, FLA. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, adopted a project for 
the improvement of Blackwater River from Milton to the mouth, 
for a channel 9 feet deep and 100 feet wide, to be obtained by dredg- 
ing at Hunts Bar within the river, and at the shoalest points within 
the bay, at an estimated cost of $20,000. (S. Doc. No. 11, 47th Cong., 
1st sess.; Annual Report for 1882, p. 1309.) Dredging was done at 
Hunts Bar under this project. A part of the work contemplated in 
the above project was not done due to improvement of the channel 
by natural causes when a portion of the project as above outlined 
was accomplished. (Annual Report for 1900, p. 2128.) 



APPENDIX. 1835 

13. HARBOR AT PENSACOLA, FLA. 

The river and harbor act approved June 18, 1878, made an appro- 
priation of $20,000 for the improvement of the harbor, including a 
survey and estimate for the removal of wrecks. Pursuant to this 
requirement of the law a portion of the appropriation was expended 
in the removal of certain wrecks in the harbor and the remainder in 
making a survey and preparing a project for the improvement of the 
harbor at a cost of $16,901.93. (Annual Report for 1879, p. 801.) It 
was reported that the shoals mentioned in Coast Survey chart of 1859 
as Middle Ground and Caucus Shoals were found to have joined 
across the main ship channel, forming an inner bar with an available 
depth across it of only 18 feet at mean low tide where formerly there 
had been 30 feet. It was also reported that the shore on the western 
side of the entrance extending north and south from Fort McEee had 
washed away considerably so that the general direction of the shore 
had materially changed. No consideration was taken in this report 
of the outer bar. The district officer suggested that the project for 
improvement should include the reestablishment of the old shore line 
so far as might be necessary to restore the former direction of the 
tidal currents, and that the channel across the inner bar should be 
dredged to a width of 300 feet and a depth of 24 feet to give relief 
to the commerce of the port; the reestablishment of the old shore 
line to be accomplished by building a training wall of brush and 
stone along its approximate former location to form the west line of 
the entrance. The estimate of the cost of this improvement was given 
as $177,250. Congress continued to make appropriations in succeed- 
ing river and harbor bills for this work, which was carried out along 
the lines proposed in this project. Work was continued thereunder 
until the project was further modified by the act of August 18, 1894, 
the sum of $330,574.75 being expended on this modification. 

Meanwhile the act of July 5, 1884, provided for an examination 
and survey of the outer and inner bars at the entrance to Pensacola 
Harbor. (H. Doc. No. 224, 48th Cong., 2d sess.; Annual Eeport for 
1885, p. 1316.) The district officer reported that the Coast Survey 
chart of 1857 showed a depth of 3| fathoms, or 22^ feet, over the 
outer bar; the survey made in 1884 showed 22 feet over the bar; and 
that the recent examination showed a scant 22 feet over it. The bar 
remained approximately constant in position and had the same depth 
over it as previously reported. He reported that it would be neces- 
sary to maintain it by continuous dredging or by expensive work of 
contraction, and that he considered the excavation of a channel 24 
feet deep at mean low water and 300 feet wide across the bar to be too 
hazardous to be undertaken. He further reported that the work of 
contraction to maintain this depth over the outer bar should not be 
undertaken before the difficulty of the inner bar had been overcome. 
He recommended that the work of dredging a channel across the 
inner bar be completed and that the shore line at Fort McEee be 
gradually advanced under the existing project, which he estimated 
could be done for the sum of $48,200. This examination recom- 
mended no modification of the existing project for the improvement 
of the locality. The work at Fort McEee was carried out as recom- 
mended. The condition of the bars having become such that relief 
was necessary, the district officer was directed by letter from the 



1836 KEPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

office of the Chief of Engineers dated March 29, 1890, to submit a 
report on the condition of the outer bar with estimate of cost to ob- 
tain the required depth by dredging. This examination was made in 
April, 1890, which showed the least depth on the outer bar to be 22J 
feet at mean low water and on the inner bar 19.G feet. The district 
officer reported that it would require $106,446 to dredge a channel 22 
feet deep and 300 feet wide through the inner and outer bars. 

The final report on this survey was submitted on January 7. L891, 
which report was then referred to a board of engineers, whose report, 
dated July 16, 1891, will be found printed, together with other 
reports, in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1891, 
page 1713. The board submitted a project for obtaining a channel 
300 feet wide and 24 feet deep bv the construction of two converging 
jetties, at an estimated cost of $1,830,400, of which $250,000 was to 
be used in supplementing the effect of the jetties b}^ dredging. The 
river and harbor act approved August 18, 1894, made an appropria- 
tion of $100,000 for this improvement, and provided that the Secre- 
tary of War might, if he deemed it advisable, begin the improvement 
recommended by the board of engineers appointed in January of 
1891 to consider and report upon the improvement of this harbor. 
Preparations were made to begin work under this project by the 
drawing up of plans and specifications for work to be done by con- 
tract. In the meantime dredging operations had been carried on 
from time to time, which resulted in a depth of 21 feet at average 
tide. In his annual report for the year 1894 the district officer set 
forth previous experience on this work with dredging, and recom- 
mended that a new channel be dredged across the Caucus Shoal and 
also recommended that the Government have built for service at this 
harbor a suitable dredge for the use of the locality. In his report 
for the following year the district officer further modified his recom- 
mendations so as to provide that the project be amended to omit the 
construction of the jetties and to place entire reliance upon dredging, 
recommending the construction of a suction dredge and opening a 
channel through Caucus Shoal to have a width at the bottom of 300 
feet and a least depth of 30 feet, following the line of ebb currents. 
(Annual Report for 1895, p. 1634.) This report was again referred 
to a board of engineers, whose report will be found printed on page 
1657 of the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1895. This 
board recommended that the experiment of obtaining a channel by 
dredging be tried and that the district officer be directed to take the 
necessary steps to secure immediately the use of a hydraulic dredge 
to open a channel 26 feet deep at mean low w 7 ater and as wide as 
practicable on the line of deepest water across Caucus Shoal approxi- 
mately on the line of the axis of the jettied channel of 1891. which 
recommendation was approved August 26, 1895. A dredge having 
been secured, work was continued on this project until it was further 
modified. The river and harbor act of March 3, 180!). made an ap- 
propriation for continuing improvement and for maintenance to be 
used toward securing a channel depth of 30 feet at mean low water 
from the Gulf of Mexico to the dock line at the east end of the city 
of Pensacola. Up to this time there had been opened a new chan- 
nel across the Caucus Shoal, with a width of 150 feet and a depth of 
24 feet at mean low water. Work was continued on this project, 
mainly under contract, until the present project was adopted. 



APPENDIX. 1837 

14. ESCAMBIA AND CONECUH RIVERS, FLA. AND ALA. 

The river and harbor acts of March 2, 1833, and July 2, 1836, made 
appropriations for removing obstructions and making navigation 
in the Escambia Eiver to the amount of $10,500, of which $5,000 was 
expended. This office has no record of the results obtained from the 
work authorized. The river and harbor act of June 18, 1878, di- 
rected an examination and survey of the Escambia and Conecuh 
Eivers. (Annual Report for 1879, p. 852, Escambia River; p. 843, 
Conecuh River.) The district officer, in the case of the Conecuh 
River, presented a project for the opening of the river to facilitate 
timber transportation by the removal of snags, closing three cut-offs, 
and the construction of some wing dams at a cost of $62,430. The 
work was carried out practically as recommended and was maintained 
until the present project for Conecuh River was adopted. 

15. ALABAMA RIVER, ALA. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1875, provided that an 
examination and survey be made of the Alabama River from We- 
tumpka to its mouth. The original project for improvement of this 
river (Annual Report for 1876, p. 498) was to obtain a width of 
channel of 200 feet and a depth of 4 feet at an estimated cost of 
$229,741. It was authorized by act of Congress approved June 18, 
1878, making an initial appropriation of $25,000 for beginning work 
under this project. Work thereunder was continued until 1892, 
when it was reported that the project had been practically completed, 
$177,985.78 being expended thereon. The river and harbor act of 
July 13, 1892, extended the project to include securing a 6-foot 
channel at low water from the mouth to Wetumpka (H. Doc. No. 
140, 51st Cong., 2d sess.; Annual Report for 1891, p. 1761) at an 
estimated cost of $386,251 for improvement and including $10,000 
annually for maintenance. Under this project a depth of about 4 
feet at mean low water was secured at a cost of $241,459.91. 

16. COOSA RIVER, GA. AND ALA. 

The river and harbor act approved July 11, 1870, contained a pro- 
vision directing an examination and survey to be made of the Coosa 
River, Ala. Pursuant to this provision of law a survey was begun 
at Wetumpka on September 13, 1870, and was continued until the 
27th of December, reaching what was known as the Selma, Rome & 
Dalton Railroad bridge across Coosa River, now the Selma-Rome 
branch of the Southern Railway, near Wilsonville, Ala., when opera- 
tions were suspended on account of high water. (Annual Report 
for 1871, p. 561.) In addition to the survey to the railroad bridge 
a reconnoissance was made of the portion of the river from the bridge 
to Greensport, Ala., and an estimate was submitted of the amount 
of work required and the cost thereof to remove the obstructions to 
navigation in the Coosa River between Greensport, Ala., and the 
point where the Selma, Rome & Dalton Railroad crosses the river 
some 77 miles below. The estimated amount was $278,484.50, and 
provided for the construction of locks and dams at Whistenants Mill 
Shoal, Ten Island Shoal, Box Shoal, and the construction of dams at 



1838 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

Broken Arrow Shoal, Chocolocco Shoal, Long Shallow Beach, 
Claimchys Shoal, Turners Mill Shoal, and rock excavations at various 
other points. No estimate appears to have been submitted in this 
report for the section of the river between Wetumpka and the Selma, 
Home & Dalton Railroad bridge at this time. Os March 23, 1872, a 
further report was submitted on this improvement under the provision 
of law above cited. This report provided for the construction of locks 
and dams from Wetumpka to the Selma, Rome & Dalton Railroad 
bridge at an estimated cost of $1,923,020. (Annual Report for 1872, 
p. 502.) On August 20, 1872, a further report was submitted under 
the same provision of law on that portion of the Coosa River between 
the railroad bridge and Greensport. (Annual Report for 1872, p. 
536.) In this report a revised estimate is submitted of the cost of 
work and the amount required to open steamboat navigation on the 
Coosa River between the Selma, Rome & Dalton Railroad bridge 
and Greensport, Ala., 74 miles above. This estimate provides for 
locks and dams at Turners Mill Shoal, at Chocolocco Shoal, at 
Broken Arrow Shoal, at Ten Island Shoal, and at Whistenants Mill 
Shoal, together with rock and gravel excavation at various other 
points. The total estimated cost of the improvement over this sec- 
tion of the river was $470,668. 

In addition to these examinations of the Coosa River as directed 
by the act of 1870, the act of March 3, 1871, directed a survey from 
the Tennessee River to the headwaters of the Warrior and Coosa 
Rivers with a view to uniting the waters of the Tennessee and Coosa 
Rivers for navigation purposes. Under this authority an examina- 
tion was made of the Coosa River between the mouth of Wills 
Creek, the terminus of the proposed canal from the Tennessee River 
and Rome, Ga. (Annual Report for 1875, vol. 2, p. 661.) This 
report provides for the construction of a lock and dam at Horseleg 
Shoal, below Rome, Ga., and for open-channel work from that point 
to the mouth of Wills Creek, the estimated cost of the improvement 
being $180,000, the dimensions of the lock to be 200 feet between 
miter sills and 32 feet wide and to have a lift of 3 feet. The river 
and harbor act approved August 14, 1876, appropriated $30,000 for 
the improvement of the Coosa River, Ga. and Ala., by the construc- 
tion of a lock and dam at Horseleg Shoal, the improvement of the 
river from Rome, Ga., to Greensport, Ala., by open-channel work, 
the construction of locks and dams at Whistenants Shoal, at Ten 
Island, at Box Shoal, at Broken Arrow Shoal, at Chocolocco Shoal, 
at Long Shallow Beach, and at Claunchvs Mill Shoal and Turners 
Mill Shoal at an estimated cost of $650,668. The estimated cost of 
improving the section of the river from Rome. Ga.. to the mouth of 
Wills Creek, including the construction of the lock and dam at 
Horseleg Shoal, was $180,000, and $470,668 for improving that part 
of the river between Greensport and the Selma. Rome & Dalton 
Railroad bridge, no estimate having been submitted to cover that 
portion of the river between Greensport and the mouth of Wills 
Creek. In 1877 work was begun under this project near Rome. Ga., 
at Horseleg Shoal and was continued down the river, while in 1878 
plans were developed for Locks Nos. 1, 2. and 3 at Whistenants Mill 
Shoal and Ten Island Shoals. Appropriations were made for the 
work from time to time, and it was carried on so as to provide an 



APPENDIX. 1839 

open river channel from Rome to Greensport. Locks Nos. 1, 2, and 
3 were constructed. Dam No. 4 was begun in 1886, the dam being 
completed, but work on the lock was suspended on account of poor 
foundations and lack of funds. 

The acts of 1880, 1881, 1884, and 1888 appropriated money for 
continuing the work below Rome and Locks Nos. 1, 2, and 3 and 
Dam No. 4. The act of 1888, however, provided that the Secretary 
of War should cause a survey to be made for a channel in and along 
the Coosa River from the rapids at Wetumpka to connect with the 
improvement already completed on the river above Ten Islands. It 
is also directed that a report be made as to the most feasible and 
economical plans for the improvement. (Annual Report for 1890, 
vol. 2, p. 1658.) The estimated cost of the improvement by locks 
and dams, supplemented by channel work, was $6,074,913, of which 
sum $968,491 applies to that section of the river above the East Ten- 
nessee, Virginia & Georgia Railroad bridge (formerly the Selma, 
Rome & Dalton Railroad). It provided for the construction by this 
sum of a lock in Dam No. 4, at Broken Arrow Shoals, and the con- 
struction of Locks and Dams Nos. 5, 6, 7, and 8, which would 
bring the improvement of the upper portion of the river to its lower 
limit. The remainder of the estimate covered the river from the 
railroad bridge to navigable water at Wetumpka. The act of Sep- 
tember 19, 1890, provided for continuing the new project between 
Rome and East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia Railroad bridge, 
and also adopted the project contained in the same report for im- 
proving the river between Wetumpka and the said bridge, the work 
being required to commence at the Wetumpka end and the size of 
the proposed locks being limited to a width of 40 feet and a length 
of 210 feet. (Note. — This provision, however, was later repealed bv 
the act of July 13, 1892.) 

The improvement of the river under these two projects was fur- 
ther authorized by acts of July 13, 1892, August 18, 1894, and June 
3, 1896. Subsequent to 1896 appropriations for lock and dam con- 
structions were omitted for several years, and the act of March 3, 
1899, being the first subsequent act which authorized the expenditure 
of any money on this stream and the appropriation contained therein 
being limited to maintenance and deepening channel over shoals 
between Rome and the East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia Rail- 
road bridge. On the lower portion of the river, under this project, 
Locks and Dams Nos. 9 to 31, inclusive, were to be constructed. Pur- 
suant to the requirements of the act of 1890, the construction of Lock 
No. 31, located at Wetumpka, was undertaken first and completed, 
except for the valves, gates, and operating mechanism. No dam was 
constructed. A considerable amount of excavation was done in the 
channel between No. 31 and proposed No. 30 above, and surveys and 
plans were made for Locks and Dams Nos. 9 and 10, but the work 
was abandoned before any further construction was undertaken; 
$404,943.66 was expended on this section of the river. 

The act of June 13, 1902, appropriated the sum of $35,000 for the 
Coosa, Oostanaula, and Coosawattee Rivers and directed that $10,000 
be deducted from appropriations made for the section of the river 
below the railroad bridge and be spent on the section above the 



1840 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

bridge. The said act further directed that a survey of the Coosa 
and Alabama Rivers be made with a view to securing a depth of 6 
feet and determining the probable expense thereof, and directed a re- 
port as to the advisability of further prosecuting the lock and dam 
project on this stream. (Annual Report for 1905, p. 1351.) The 
report stated that a 6-foot navigation could be obtained on the river 
from Gadsden, Ala., to the mouth below Wetumpka at a cost of 
$11,024,706, and stated that in the opinion of the district officer it was 
not advisable to further prosecute the present project for locks and 
dams on the Coosa River, further than to complete Lock No. 4 and 
to construct a dam at site No. 5, a short distance below Riverside. 
The view was concurred in by the Chief of Engineers and the divi- 
sion engineer. Congress apparently coincided in this view, as no 
further appropriations were made except for maintaining the river 
between Rome, Ga., and Lock No. 4, for the completion of Lock No. 
4, and the construction of Dam No. 5, the acts of March 3, 1905, and 
March 2, 1907, being limited to continuing the improvement and 
maintenance between Rome and Lock No. 4. The following tabu- 
lation shows the interrelation of the various estimates : 



Item. 


Miles. 


Estimate. 


Where found. 




108.5 
20.5 


$180, 000 

2 181,599 

470, 668 

269, 069 

968, 491 

3 6,074,913 

5, 106, 422 

282,000 

134,000 

< 241, 039 


Annual Report, 1875, vol. 2, p. 661. 


Wills Creek- Whistenant (Greensport-Loek 
No. IV 


Dam No. 4-East Tennessee, Virginia & 
Georgia R. R. bridge. 

East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia R. R. 
bridge-Wetumpka. 


48.0 

68.0 
10.0 


Annual Report 1872, p. 536. 

Annual Report 1890, p. 1658. 

H. Doc. No. 1421, 60th Cong., 2d sess. 






6.5 


H. Doc. No. 1115, 60th Cong., 2d sess. 





• None made. 

' Work provided for in this estimate not begun before work under subsequent estimate was authorized. 
« Replaced former estimate for this section. 

* Act of Mar. 2, 1907, ordered a survey for lock and dam at Horseleg Shoals, but the site recommended 
was at Mayos Bar. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE MOBILE (ALA.) 
DISTRICT. 



1. MOBILE HARBOR, ALA. 



The improvement of the channel of Mobile Harbor has been pro- 
gressive. Between 1826, the date of the first appropriation for this 
work, and 1857 a channel 10 feet deep was dredged through the 
shoals in Mobile Bay up to the city of Mobile. Between 1870 and 
1876 this depth was increased to 13 feet, the channel being dredged 
to a width of 300 feet through Choctaw Pass and 200 feet through 
Dog River Bar. In 1880 a project for a channel 17 feet deep at mean 
low water and 200 feet wide was adopted, and appropriations be- 
tween 1878 and 1886 were applied to the formation of a channel of 
these dimensions. In the river and harbor act of August 11, 1888, a 



APPENDIX. 1841 

project for securing a channel 23 feet deep at mean low water was 
adopted, this project being modified by the river and harbor act of 
September 19, 1890, so as to provide for the formation of a channel 23 
feet deep and with a top width of 280 feet from the Gulf of Mexico 
to the mouth of Chickasaw Creek, above the city of Mobile. Work 
upon this channel was completed in 1896, subsequent appropriations, 
up to and including that made by the sundry civil act of July 1, 1898, 
having been applied to its maintenance. The total amount expended 
on these projects was $3,648,630.60, of which about $115,000 is esti- 
mated to have been applied to maintenance. 

The next project for the improvement of Mobile Harbor was that 
adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, and provided 
for the formation of a channel 23 feet deep and 100 feet wide at bot- 
tom, with appropriate side slopes, from the entrance of the bay to the 
mouth of Chickasaw Creek. Work on this project continued until 
its virtual completion on July 12, 1909. The act of June 13, 1902, 
made the removal of sunken obstructions part of the maintenance 
work in Mobile Harbor. The total amount expended on the above 
project was $1,896,860.58, of which $610,832.07 was applied to work of 
maintenance. 

3. BLACK WARRIOR, WARRIOR. AND TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, ALA. 

Other than the present project, there has been no single project 
applicable to the entire length of the river covered by the above desig- 
nation. Prior projects for the individual streams comprising this 
improvement may be stated as follows: 

Black Warrior River. — The name Black Warrior was formerly ap- 
plied to that portion of the river above Tuscaloosa. On this section 
of the river the first project was that of 1887, which, by act of June 
13, 1902, was merged with projects for the Warrior and Tombigbee 
Rivers, forming, with successive extensions and modifications, the 
present general project. 

Warrior River. — The name Warrior River was formerly applied 
to the portion of the river from Tuscaloosa to Demopolis, and the 
original project for its improvement was adopted by the river and 
harbor act approved March 3, 1875, which provided for deepening the 
channel by jetty construction and removal of snags and overhanging 
trees. The amount expended under this project between the years 
1880 and 1899, prior to the adoption of the project dated March 3, 
1899 (which on June 13, 1902, was merged with projects for the 
Black Warrior and Tombigbee Rivers), was $319,388.30. In addi- 
tion to the above expenditures, there have been expended on the 
Warrior and Tombigbee Rivers, jointly, appropriations aggregating 
$88,000, authorized as follows : 

Mar. 3, 1875, improvement of the Black Warrior River below Tusca- 
loosa and Tombigbee below Demopolis $25,000 

Aug. 14, 1S76, improvement of Warrior and Tombigbee Rivers 15' 000 

June 18, 1878, improvement of Warrior and Tombigbee Rivers 28! 000 

Mar 3, 1879, improvement of Warrior and Tombigbee Rivers 2o! 000 

Tomoigoee River, Ala. — The section of this river included in the 
improvement under discussion extends from Demopolis to the junc- 
tion with the Mobile River, 45 miles above Mobile. There have been 
8373°— eng 1915 116 



1842 EEPOET OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

no prior projects for its improvement other than that under which 
the $88,000 mentioned above under the Warrior River was expended. 1 
The above projects, involving a total expenditure of $407,388.30, 
are the only prior projects applicable to any of the streams under 
this improvement, and have been so regarded in annual reports. 

4. TOMBIGBEE RIVER, ALA., FROM MOUTH TO DEMOPOLIS (MAINTE- 
NANCE OF CHANNEL). 

The original project for the improvement of this section was 
adopted in 1871, and contemplated the removal of snags and other 
obstructions in the channel of river and the widening and deepening 
of the existing channel through various shoals, at an estimated cost 
of $21,500. This project was completed in 1873, at a cost of $5,332.95 
for improvement. 

The project adopted in 1879 was to afford a channel of navigable 
width and 4 feet depth at ordinary low water from the mouth to 
Demopolis, Ala., a distance of 185 miles, by the removal of snags, 
logs, and overhanging trees and the improvement of the worst bars 
by dredging. Under this project $60,209.53 was expended for im- 
provement. 

The earlier projects for the improvement of this section of the 
Tombigbee River was superseded by the project adopted in the river 
and harbor act of September, 1890, which provided for securing a 
channel 6 feet deep at low water between the mouth and Demopolis 
by the construction of locks and dams, bank revetments, and by the 
removal of logs, snags, and other obstructions. The cost of this 
project was originally estimated at $508,808.98, but in 1897. after 
$330,000 had been appropriated for the work, the estimate increased, 
the additional cost of completion being then placed at $600,000. 
Under this project $134,000 was expended for improvement and 
$50,000 for maintenance, exclusive of lock and dam construction, 
which was merged with project of 1902, succeeding. 

Prior to the adoption of this project of 1902, for maintenance 
$249,542.48 had been expended on previous projects. 

5. TOMBIGBEE RIVER, FROM DEMOPOLIS, ALA., TO WALKERS 
BRIDGE, MISS. 

Formerly this section was operated as four separate improve- 
ments — Demopolis to Vienna, Vienna to Cotton Gin (or Amory), Co- 
lumbus to Fulton, and Fulton to Walkers Bridge. It was subse- 
quently combined into two improvements — Demopolis to Columbus 
and Columbus to Walkers Bridge — and these two have since been 
combined into one improvement, Demopolis to Walkers Bridge. The 
original project of 1871 contemplated the improvement of this stream 
between Demopolis and Columbus, a distance of 149 miles, by the 
removal of snags and other obstructions and by the widening and 
deepening of the existing channels through various bars. In 1879 
this project was modified so as to provide for the formation of a 

1 Under another project, known as "Improving Tombigbee Biver, Ala. (mouth to 
Demopolis)," may be found record of prior projects for this portion of the river. I>ut as 
these have no connection with the work of the improvement under discussion, they are 
not mentioned here. 



APPENDIX. 1843 

channel of navigable width and 3 feet depth at low water from 
Demopolis to Columbus. 

The project for the improvement of the river above Columbus was 
adopted in 1873, and provided for obtaining a good high- water chan- 
nel by the removal of obstructions at an estimated cost of $35,000. 
This project was completed in 18S2 at a cost of $27,293.65, since 
which time operations have been directed toward maintenance, this 
being the existing project. 

The project for the improvement of the river from Fulton to 
Walkers Bridge, a distance of 25 miles, was adopted in 1888, and 
provided for securing a high-water channel by removal of logs, 
snags, and overhanging trees. It was completed in 1891 at a cost 
of $6,517.19, since which time operations have been directed toward 
maintenance, this being the existing project. 

By department indorsement, dated April 14, 1911, work on this 
river is now restricted to improvement at and below Aberdeen, Miss., 
a distance of 199 miles above Demopolis. Prior to the adoption of 
the existing project $63,382.98 was expended on the section between 
Demopolis and Columbus. 

8. PASCAGOULA HARBOR, MISS. 

Appropriations were made for improving Pascagoula River at its 
mouth in 1827, 1828, and 1832, but there is no record of the work 
accomplished with those funds. The amounts appropriated in 1878 
to 1879 were for improving Pascagoula River, Miss. The first defi- 
nite project for the improvement at the mouth of this stream was 
adopted by the river and harbor act of June 14, 1880. This act 
was based on the report of an examination of this locality, made in 
compliance with the river and harbor act of June 18, 1878, and con- 
tained in House Document No. 95, Forty-fifth Congress, third ses- 
sion. It contemplated securing a channel 7 feet deep and 200 feet 
wide across the bar at the mouth of the river by dredging, the con- 
struction of certain wing dams and jetties, and the removal of snags 
and overhanging trees from the river above at a cost of $57,292.40. 
The dredging was estimated to cost $17,400. At the mouth of the 
river the project was practically completed in March, 1882, by the 
formation of a channel 7-| to 8 feet deep and from 180 to 190 feet 
wide. Snagging work under this project was prosecuted between 
June, 1882, and December, 1884, with the following results: From 
the mouth to a point 50£ miles above, project completed ; from the 
latter point to the junction of the Leaf and Chickasahay Rivers, 
project was partially completed, logs and stumps removed, but no 
bank work done. 

The amount appropriated and expended on these works from 
June 18, 1878, to July 1, 1885, is as follows : 

Appropriated $59, 000. 00 

Expended 58, 430. 84 

Balance 569.16 

The total amount expended from the date of the first appropria- 
tion in 1827 was $74,500. 

A new project was adopted by the river and harbor act of August 
5, 1886, which provided for securing a channel of navigable width 



1844 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

and a minimum depth of 12 feet from Moss Point to the anchorage 
in Mississippi Sound, at an estimated cost of $78,100, and maintain- 
ing the river above Moss Point in its improved condition at an esti- 
mated cost of $2,500 per annum. From the date of the adoption of 
this project to June 3, 1896, the following appropriations were made : 

Aug. 5, 1SS6 $20,000 

Aug. 5, 1886 (transferred amount appropriated for improving Horn 

Island Pass, act July 5, 1884) 5,000 

Aug. 11, 18SS 27. 000 

Sept. 19, 1890 20,000 

July 13, 1892 20,000 

Aug. 17, 1894 13,000 

June 3, 1896J 6, 000 

Total 111, 000 

Under this project a channel was formed having a depth of 12 
feet over a width of 80 feet from Moss Point to the mouth of the 
river, and a channel of 12 feet deep over a width of from 80 to 120 
feet was dredged from the mouth of the river to a point in Missis- 
sippi Sound 10,072 feet beyond, thus partially completing the proj- 
ect. In order to reach the 12-foot contour this channel would have 
had to extend 8,826 feet farther. From March 2, 1827, to June 30, 
1897, appropriations amounting to $200,500 had been made, and ex- 
penditures during this time, exclusive of sums spent for snagging, 
amounted to $161,817.60. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, adopted another project 
for the improvement of Pascagoula River, which provided for the 
formation of a channel 12 feet deep from a point in the Dog River 3 
miles above its mouth down the Pascagoula River to the 12-foot 
contour in Mississippi Sound, the width of channel to be 150 feet 
above and 300 feet below the Louisville & Nashville Railroad 
bridge at Pascagoula, Miss. The estimated cost was $317,600, in- 
cluding the removal of certain shoal spots in the Horn Island 
anchorage. 

Work under this project was in progress between September, 
1899, and February, 1902, during which time an uninterrupted 12- 
foot channel was obtained within the limits of the project in Pas- 
cagoula River, while a 20-foot channel was formed through the 
shoal areas in Horn Island anchorage. The sum of $304,364.36 was 
expended on this project to June 30, 1902, no portion of which was 
applied to maintenance. 

The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, modified and extended 
this project so as to provide for a channel 17 feet deep instead of 12 
feet from 3 miles above the mouth of Dog River to Mississippi 
Sound at a total cost of $1,050,222, exclusive of the Horn Island 
improvement. The river and harbor act approved June 25, 1910, 
further modified the project for this improvement by extending the 
upper limit about 1 mile farther up Dog River, increasing the total 
cost of the project by $8,000. With subsequent modifications this 
project provided for a channel 17 feet deep and 150 feet wide from 
a point on Dog River 4 miles above its mouth down Dog River and 
Pascagoula River to the railroad bridge at Pascagoula, Miss, (for- 
merly Scranton), thence 17 feet deep and 300 feet wide to the deep 
water in Mississippi Sound. As thus modified this channel was 
completed above the railroad bridge at Pascagoula and completed to 



APPENDIX. 1845 

its project depth over a width of 225 feet below this bridge in 1910 
at a total cost of $302,097.25. The sum of S358.5S2.05 has since been 
expended in maintaining this project, but no attempt has been made 
to obtain the full project width of 300 feet in Mississippi Sound. 
The depth of the channel across the bar at Horn Island through 
natural causes increased from 14 or 15 feet in 1853 to about 18 feet 
in 1886. Since the latter date this channel has been available for 
vessels up to a draft of slightly less than 18 feet at mean low water. 

Under the appropriation for improving Pascagoula River, Miss., 
carried by the river and harbor acts of August 18, 1894, and June 3, 
1896, provision was made for the removal of the bar in Horn Island 
Pass. In conformity with this provision a channel with a least depth 
of 19.5 feet referred to the existing datum and with a width of 200 
feet was dredged through the Horn Island Bar, but the benefit of 
the improvement was soon lost through shoaling. The total cost of 
this work was $7,682.40. Under the appropriations for Pascagoula 
River and Horn Island Pass carried by the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1899, and the sundry civil act of June 6, 1900, an amount 
estimated at $88,000 was between 1899 and 1901 applied to dredging 
a 20-fcot (19 feet present datum) channel at certain shoal areas in 
the Horn Island anchorage basin. 

The last project for the improvement of Horn Island Pass pro- 
vided for the formation of a channel 21 feet deep at mean low 
water, 300 feet wide through the outer bar, and 200 feet wide else- 
where in the pass at an estimated cost of $40,480 and $9,000 annually 
to preserve the improvement. This project was adopted by the 
river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, which carried an appropria- 
tion of $40,480 for the work. The project was completed by the U. S. 
dredge Charleston in 1907. Work since that date has been for main- 
tenance only. Of the amount spent on the Horn Island Pass im- 
provement $136,162.40 was expended for new work and $36,475 for 
maintenance. 

9. PASCAGOULA, LEAF, AND CHICKASAHAY RIVERS, MISS. 

PASCAGOUEA RIVER ABOVE THE MOUTH OF DOG RIVER. 

The original project for this river was adopted in 1880, and in 
addition to providing for dredging work at the mouth (for which 
see report on Pascagoula Harbor, Miss.), contemplated improvement 
of the river above by the removal of snags and overhanging trees. 
Under this project the river was cleared of obstructions between 1882 
and 1884 at a cost of $15,000, since which time funds have been 
applied to maintenance under existing project adopted in 1886. 
Report of the examination on which the original project was based 
is printed in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1879, 
page 835. 

CHICKASAHAY RTVER. 

The original project for this stream was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of September 19, 1890, and provided for obtaining a 
high- water channel from the mouth to Shubuta, Miss., a distance of 
130 miles, by the removal of obstructions from the channel and 
overhanging trees from the banks. The river and harbor act of 



1846 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

June 3, 1896, modified this project by limiting the improvement to 
that part of the river between the mouth and Bucatunna, Miss., about 
75 miles. The project further provided for the maintenance of the 
improved channel, and, as modified, was completed in the latter part 
of 1896 at a cost of $12,399.73, of which $328.83 was for maintenance. 
The project was based on an examination made in 1888, report of 
which is printed in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers 
for 1889, page 1463. 

10. BILOXI HARBOR, MISS. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
August 2, 1882, and contemplated the formation of a channel through 
Deer Island Flats to connect Biloxi Bay with the Back Bay of Biloxi, 
at an estimated cost of $35,000. The channel thus proposed was to 
have a depth of 8 feet at mean low water, no width being mentioned. 
No work was ever done under this project. 

11. GULFPORT HARBOR AND SHIP ISLAND PASS, MISS. 

There has been no previous project for Ship Island Pass. The 
original project for Gulf port Harbor was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of March 3, 1899, and provided for the formation and 
maintenance of an anchorage basin at Gulf port 1,320 by 2,640 feet in 
superficial dimensions, and a channel therefrom to the 19-foot con- 
tour in Mississippi Sound, a distance of about 7 miles. In the act 
of 1899 a depth of 19 feet at mean low water was specified for both 
the basin and the harbor channel, and a width of 300 feet for the 
latter, the estimated cost of this work being $748,109.96 for construc- 
tion and $25,000 annually for maintenance. (See H. Doc. No. 120, 
55th Cong., 3d sess.) The same act, however, authorized the Secre- 
tary of War to enter into a contract to dredge the channel and 
anchorage basin, at a cost not to exceed $150,000. and to contract for 
the maintenance of this channel and anchorage basin for the term of 
five years after its completion for the sum of $10,000 annually. Such 
a contract was entered into in 1901 and work was begun on April 
26, 1901. Considerable difficulty was experienced by the contractor 
in dredging the channel and anchorage basin to the required dimen- 
sions, and finally, by joint resolution of Congress, approved June 14, 
1906, authority was granted to accept the channel and basin as 
dredged and to pay the contractor $150,000 for the work. The main- 
tenance period of five years was held to begin on the date of the 
above joint resolution. The river and harbor act approved March 
2, 1907. authorized the Secretary of War to annul that portion of 
the contract relating to the maintenance of the channel and anchor- 
age basin, and this was effected by supplemental agreement approved 
by the Secretary of War June 11. 1907. This project was modified 
by the river and harbor act of June 25, 1910. which authorized a 
depth of not to exceed 23 feet in the basin and the channel. 

13. EAST PEARL RIVER. MISS. 

The original project, adopted by the river and harbor act of July 
5, 1884, provided for a channel 12 feet deep at mean low water. 
The estimated cost of the formation of this channel, no width being 



APPENDIX. 1847 

mentioned, was $20,000. (Annual Report for 1885, p. 1367.) Under 
this project $5,000 was appropriated in 1888 and also in 1890, and 
bids were received, but were rejected as too high, no work whatever 
being done. Under the provisions of the river and harbor act of 
June 3, 1896, a survey was made with a view to obtaining a channel 
17 feet deep at mean low water, and the report thereon is printed in 
Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1897, page 1727, and in 
House Document No. 206, Fifty-fourth Congress, second session. A 
channel 300 feet wide and 9 feet deep at mean low water was all that 
could then be recommended, the estimated cost being $18,199.80. 
This project was adopted bv the river and harbor act of March 3, 
1899, and an appropriation of $18,199.80 made for the work. With 
these funds and the two former appropriations of $5,000 each a 
channel of the projected dimensions was finally dredged, at a cost of 
$27,853.92, the work being completed February 5, 1900. The balance 
of $345.88 was turned back into the Treasury. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OP PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE NEW ORLEANS 
(LA.) DISTRICT. 



1 AND 2. SOUTH PASS AND SOUTHWEST PASS, MISSISSIPPI RIVER. 

The first appropriation of $75,000 for improvement of the en- 
trances to the Mississippi River was made by river and harbor act of 
July 4, 1836, and provided for closing some of the passages out of 
it by cutting ship channel, or by any other means which would be 
deemed expedient after the necessary survey was made. The next 
appropriation, $210,000, for improvement of entrances to the river, 
was made by river and harbor act of March 3, 1837, and upon rec- 
ommendation of a board of engineers attempts were made to open 
Southwest Pass by using the ordinary bucket drag. No permanent 
improvement was effected, however, as a single storm sufficed to 
obliterate all the work which had been done. 

Nothing further was done until an appropriation of $75,000 was 
made by the river and harbor act of August 30, 1852, for opening 
a ship channel of sufficient capacity to accommodate the wants of 
commerce, the work to be done by contract. A mixed board of one 
Naval and three Army Engineer officers was convened to decide 
how the appropriation should be applied. This board reported that 
under the limited 1852 appropriation no other plan than that of 
stirring up the bottom seemed adequate for obtaining any important 
results. In accordance with this report a contract was entered into 
with the Towboat Association, by which a channel through the bar 
of Southwest Pass 18 feet deep and 300 feet wide was made. The 
harrowing and dragging process, employed by the Towboat Asso- 
ciation, proved successful, and a channel 18 feet deep was maintained 
for a whole year. 

The report of the 1852 board is published in Executive Document 
No. 16, Thirty-third Congress, first session. This board reported 
that there were several methods by which the ship channel might be 



1848 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

improved, and stated them in the order of their simplicity, ease of 
work, and initial cost, as follows : 

First. Stirring up the material of the channel bed by various 
means so that the river currents might carry away such material 
while in suspension. 

Second. Assisting the stirring method by dredging and by carry- 
ing the dredged materials away by barges, etc., for special deposit 
outside of the channel. 

Third. By narrowing, revetting, and jettying the mouths of the 
passes selected for ship channels and then closing the other passes. 

Fourth. In case the above methods prove unsuccessful, then by con- 
necting the deep-river channel at some suitable point between New 
Orleans and the passes by a ship canal to deep water in the adjoining 
Gulf. 

The board recommended that these methods be tried in the order 
above given and that such work, being of experimental nature, should 
be done by Government forces rather than by contract. The first and 
second methods were considered doubtful as to permanent results 
but worth trying. In their discussion of the third method, that of 
jettying the pass selected for ship channels and closing minor passes, 
the board stated that " the project of jetties is based upon the simple 
fact that by confining the waters, which now escape uselessly in 
lateral directions, to a narrow channel, the depth in this narrow chan- 
nel must be increased; in other words, the existing bar must be cut 
away." The fourth method, by the construction of a ship canal, was 
not recommended for trial until after the failure of the prior methods 
(the evident reason being that it would be more expensive and not as 
desirable as an open channel). 

The 18-foot channel secured by the 1852 appropriation having dis- 
appeared, the sum of $330,000 was appropriated by the river and 
harbor act of July 8, 1856, for opening and keeping open a ship 
channel of sufficient capacity to accommodate the wants of commerce 
through Southwest Pass and Pass a Loutre, and required that such 
work should be done by contract. A board of engineers recom- 
mended that the bid of the Towboat Association be accepted for 
keeping open Southwest Pass by stirring up the bottom and that the 
method of keeping open the pass by jetties and closure of lateral passes 
be applied to both passes, and a contract was according^ made to do 
this work. Work under the contract was begun at Southwest Pass by 
building a jetty about a mile long on the west side of the proposed 
channel. The appropriation being small in proportion to the work 
required for good results, the jetty was necessarily of light construc- 
tion and consisted of a single row of pile planks strengthened at 
intervals by round piles. The structure was entirely too frail, and, 
after it had been seriously damaged by storm, the plan was aban- 
doned, and the contractors were permitted to resort to the stirring-up 
process, which resulted in securing and maintaining, as long as that 
process was continued, an 18-foot channel. Further appropriations 
for work under the jetty method were prevented for several years by 
the advent of the Civil War. 

By river and harbor act of March 2, 1867, an appropriation of 
$200,000 was made, and the construction of two dredges was author- 
ized for this improvement. Under this authority the Government 
built a powerful dredge boat of special design, with a powerful cutter 



APPENDIX. 1849 

and deflector, which was operated under the very best of conditions, 
but since it simply functioned by stirring up the material and de- 
flecting it into the current, it did not succeed in maintaining a much 
deeper channel than that formerly secured by the simpler and less 
costly machines. 

An act approved March 3, 1873, appropriated $34,988.53 to pay for 
work done by Horace Taylor, or by his authority, on the bar at 
the mouth of the Mississippi River, and for all claims under and 
by virtue of a contract entered into between him and Bvt. Lieut. Col. 
M. D. McAlester, of the date of November 5, 1866. 

The necessities of commerce made it imperative that a better 
channel connection with the Mississippi River be obtained at an 
early date, and under a resolution of the House of Representatives 
of March 14, 1871, the Secretary of War was requested to cause an 
examination and survey, with plans and estimate of cost, to be made 
by an officer of the engineers for a ship canal to connect the Missis- 
sippi River with the Gulf of Mexico, or the navigable waters thereof, 
suitable location and dimensions for military, naval, and commer- 
cial purposes, and that he report upon the feasibility of the same to 
the House of Representatives. 

The survey and estimates for canal, near Fort St. Philip, were 
submitted by a board of engineer officers, who reported that the con- 
struction of the canal with a depth of 27 feet and bottom width of 
200 feet, having at the river end a lock with chamber 500 feet long, 
60 feet wide, and depth over sill of 25 feet, was feasible and desir- 
able, and was estimated to cost $10,273,000. A minority of the board 
(Gen. Barnard) reported that the experience gained with the jetties 
was sufficient to warrant still better results, and that the advantages 
of an open river were sufficient to warrant further experiments in 
this method at Southwest Pass, and he reasoned that the success of 
the jetty system, as applied to the mouth of the Danube, presaged 
even greater success if applied at South Pass. 

The report of the board upon the canal project and the jetty 
method was followed by a proposition of Mr. James B. Eads, in Feb- 
ruary, 1874, to improve the entrance to the Mississippi River by jet- 
ties at Southwest Pass, for the sum of $10,000,000, payment to begin 
after a depth of 20 feet was secured and continuing as certain greater 
depths were secured until 28 feet had been secured and $5,000,000 
had been paid, the remaining $5,000,000 to be paid in installments 
of $500,000 each, conditional upon the permanence of the channel 
for 10 j^ears. 

A controversy resulted as a consequence of this proposition between 
the advocates of the canal on one side and the supporters of the 
jetty system on the other side, and since a part of the discussion was 
theoretical, it was impossible to decide which was the better until 
further investigation of the jetty method could be had. Accordingly, 
on June 23, 1874, an act was passed, constituting a commission to 
investigate and report upon the improvement of the mouth of the 
Mississippi River. The report of this board was submitted January 
13, 1875. (Report printed in Annual Report, 1875, p. 948.) 

The board investigated the question of a canal below New Orleans, 
and estimated the cost of construction at $10,296,500 and $60,885 per 
annum for maintenance. 



1850 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

This board also considered the question of jetties, taking into con- 
sideration South Pass, Pass a Loutre, and "Southwest Pass, and 
recommended construction of jetties at South Pass, at an estimated 
cost of $5,342,110 and annual cost of extensions, etc., $130,000; for 
Southwest Pass, estimated first cost for jetties $8,253,124 and an- 
nual cost for extensions, etc., $390,000. 

The proposition of Mr. Eads, for the construction of the jetties 
at South Pass for $5,250,000, was accepted by the United States in 
1875, and was along the lines of the recommendations made by this 
board. Work under his contract was commenced June 2, 1875, and 
completed in 1879. The maintenance period ended January 28, 1901. 
The total cost of the work, with maintenance, was $8,000,000. 

The act of February 17, 1898, allotted $10,000 from the appropria- 
tion of $250,000 made by the river and harbor act of February 26, 
1897, for the closing of a crevasse in Pass a Loutre, for the purpose 
of making a survey to determine the practicability of securing a 
navigable channel of adequate width and 35 feet in depth at mean 
low water of the Gulf of Mexico, through the Southwest Pass of the 
Mississippi River. The board was composed of three Engineer 
officers, and their report was printed in House Document No. 142, 
Fifty-fifth Congress, third session. 

The board proposed the construction of parallel jetties in prolonga- 
tion of the channel beyond the crest of the bar, and in addition to 
these certain auxiliary works were provided, including the con- 
struction of two dredges, all at a total estimated cost of $13,000,000. 

4(a). LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN, LA. 

The river and harbor act of August 30, 1852, appropriated $25,000 
for harbor of refuge near Milneburg, in Lake Pontchartrain. Work 
was begun in 1853, and was finished in March, 1855. The breakwater 
consisted of four lines of piling, each about 1,500 feet long, and was 
located in front of the Pontchartrain Railroad wharf, about on the 
12-foot contour. Piles were spaced 8 feet apart and were topped with 
square timbers. 

While the top of the breakwater was in place it acted as a good 
protection, but by the fall of 1856, or during the winter of 1856 and 
1857, the top was washed off and from that time it became a bad 
obstruction. In foggy weather schooners at times ran into it and 
incurred damages, and one schooner ran through it and was wrecked. 

At the time the examination was made (report printed in H. Doc. 
881, 60th Cong., 1st sess.) there remained about 1,000 piles in all. in 
four rows, constituting a dangerous obstruction to navigation. 

9. BAYOU LAFOURCHE, LA. 

The original project for this improvement was adopted in 1879, 
and is based on a survey authorized by the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1873. Report of this survey is published in the Annual Re- 
port of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year ending June 30, 
1874, page 765, and provides for the improvement of the bayou by 
the removal of obstructions, snags, wrecks, and overhanging trees, etc. 



APPENDIX. 1851 

The first appropriation was made by the river and harbor act of 
June 13, 1878, amounting to $10,000, and subsequent appropriations 
were made bv the river and harbor acts of March 3, 1879, $10,000; 
June 14, 1880*, $5,000; and July 5, 1881, $5,000; a total of $30,000. 

Work on this improvement was suspended December 31, 1881, on 
account of high water, and resumed in September, 1882. From this 
time until January, 1883, the work was carried on steadily to a point 
30 miles below Lockport, when the funds being nearly exhausted 
and the water becoming too high the plant was taken to Lockport 
and laid up. 

The river and harbor act of August 22, 1882, directed that a sur- 
vey be made. This survey was made in 1883, and report of same 
was published in Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for the 
fiscal year ending June 30, 1884, page 1291. 

No work was done during the year ending June 30, 1884, the bal- 
ance of available funds being too small. 

In 1884, an amended project was submitted, and work was resumed 
in September, 1884, and continued until January, 1885, when it was 
again stopped on account of high water. No further work was done 
under this project. The total expenditures under this project was 
$29,920.39. 

10. BAYOU TERREBONNE, LA. 

The first work of improvement on Bayou Terrebonne was per- 
formed in accordance with the report dated February 27, 1880, pub- 
lished in House Executive Document No. 54, Forty-sixth Congress, 
second session. The improvement provides for a channel 4 feet 
deep at low water below Houma, by dredging and the clearing of 
the banks of overhanging trees, at an estimated cost of $18,800, 
afterwards increased to $38,800. 

Under this project the work of dredging was carried on from 1880 
to 1887, and channel 4 feet deep at low water secured for 23J miles 
below Houma. A dredge boat was also constructed and partly paid 
for from the appropriations for this work. The expenditures under 
this project amounted to $38,641.10, which included a portion of the 
expense of the construction and repair of the dredge boat, and 
$158.90 reverted to the Treasury. 

Due to a severe storm in 1909, Bayou Terrebonne and adjacent 
waterways became much obstructed by trees, marsh grass, etc., and 
under the provisions of the emergency appropriation act of March 
3, 1905, allotments aggregating $10,000 were made by the Secretary 
of war for the restoration of usual channel depths and removal of 
obstructions. In Bayou Terbonne, 4,550 feet of channel was dredged; 
in Bush Canal, 5,222 feet ; and in Bayou Little Caillou, 4,400 feet was 
dredged. Bayou Terrebonne was also cleared of obstructions for a 
distance of 6,260 feet. The cost of this work was $8,422.73. The 
balance amounting to $1,577.27 reverted to the Treasury. 

There was expended on all projects prior to the present project 
the sum of $47,463.83. 

12. BAYOU TECHE, LA. 

The river and harbor act of March 2, 1829, provided for makiug 
a survey and estimate of cost of the entrance of Bayou Teche, with 
a view to improvement and shortening navigation of same. The 



1852 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

survey was made, and it was estimated that the cost of necessary 
improvement would amount to $30,000. 

On May 5, 1870, a resolution was approved providing for survey 
and estimate of the cost of removing obstructions from the Bayou 
Teche, La. The survey was made (Annual Report for 1870, p. 347), 
and the river and harbor act of July 11, 1870, appropriated $17,500 
for this work. The work was carried on by hired labor removing 
snags, overhanging trees, and other obstructions between the mouth 
of the stream and St. Martinville, La., a distance of about 75J 
miles. 

An examination of this bayou was authorized by the river and harbor 
act of March 3, 1879; a report with plans and estimates was pub- 
lished. (H. Ex. Doc. No. 54, 46th Cong., 2d sess., and Annual Report 
for 1880, p. 1167.) The improvement recommended in this report, 
provided for slack-water navigation as far up as Leonville, about 
113^ miles from mouth of the bayou; three timber locks, with needle 
dams, were recommended besides removal of snags, etc., at an esti- 
mated cost of $58,190. The river and harbor act of June 4, 1880, 
appropriated $6,000 for commencement of this work. This was 
expended in removal of snags, overhanging trees, etc., between St. 
Martinville and Leonville, work being completed June, 1881. River 
and harbor act of March 3, 1881, made an appropriation of $20,000. 
and limited the improvement from St. Martinville to Port Barre, 
La.; in submitting subproject for its expenditure, it was recom- 
mended that a detailed survey, before precise plans were attempted, 
be made. This recommendation was approved and survey com- 
pleted in 1883, extending from the head to Charenton, a point about 
30 miles above the mouth. The data obtained recommended two 
locks having a lift of about 8 feet each, with a view to carrying low- 
water navigation to within 4 miles of Port Barre, at the head of 
the Teche, and that at ordinary high water this distance is also 
navigable. The estimate for this plan, which included removal of 
snags and obstructions was $135,625. One lock was located 5 mil^s 
below St. Martinville and the other below Bayou Fusilier. There 
being insufficient funds on hand for the completion of one of the 
locks, it was decided in 1884 that the slack-water improvement 
should not be started for the time being. River and harbor act of 
June 5, 1884, made appropriation of $6,000 for " continuing improve- 
ment." It was recommended that this appropriation, or as much 
of it as needed, be applied to removal of obstructions from the mouth 
to the head of the stream. This work was carried on, and in Feb- 
ruary, 1886, it was reported that there existed a channel sufficient 
to permit vessels 40 feet wide, drawing 5 feet to ascend to a point 
3 miles below Arnaudville, La., and even 2 miles farther, excepting 
for the obstruction of the bayou by a fixed bridge. 

A careful survey and study of the available water supply was 
made in 1886 which resulted in the plans and estimates being modi- 
fied. The plan proposed contemplated the construction of one lock 
and movable dam at an estimated cost of $175,000 and $12,750 per 
annum for operation and maintenance, with a view to carrying slack 
water up to Arnaudville, about 31 miles above St. Martinville. This 
plan w as not undertaken. 



APPENDIX. 1853 

The river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, directed that an- 
other examination of the bayou from St. Martinville to Port Barre be 
made. This was done, and report recommended that the best means 
of meeting the requirements of commerce in the upper bayou was 
the construction of a submerged dam at St. Martinville of such a 
height that would back the water up to Leonville, at an estimated 
cost of $5,000. It was stated that in order to get sufficient data for a 
reliable estimate of cost, and to determine the effect of a dam, a de- 
tailed survey would be necessary. This plan was not undertaken. 

Since 1891 the improvement of the bayou has been limited to that 
portion of the stream between the mouth and St. Martinville. 

An examination of the bayou was directed by the river and harbor 
act of June 3, 1896. Report upon this examination was printed in 
House Document No. 69, Fifty-fifth Congress, first session. The plan 
of improvement recommended provided for securing a 6-foot navi- 
gation between St. Martinville and Port Barre by the construction 
of two locks in the Teche, one to be located below St. Martinville 
and the other below the mouth of Bayou Fusilier, and contemplates 
certain other construction and dredging. Estimated cost, $245,086. 

No action was taken on this report, and the Committee on Rivers 
and Harbors requested the board of engineers to prepare and submit 
a supplemental report upon the above project, with a view to ascer- 
taining whether the improvement of the channel can be obtained by 
the plans already considered and reported upon, or by other plans, 
and whether such channel would be feasible and desirable. This re- 
port was published in Rivers and Harbors Committee Document No. 
39, Sixty-first Congress, second session. The board reported that the 
improvement of Bayou Teche above St. Martinville is not worthy of 
being undertaken by the General Government, but in stating this 
opinion the board realizes that the physical conditions of the stream 
as well as the needs of commerce may have materially changed since 
the survey of 1897, and recommended a resurvey. 

Resurvey of the bayou was made and the report was published in 
House Document No. 527, Fifty-ninth Congress, first session, and is 
the basis of the present project, which was adopted by the act of 
March 2, 1907. 

The amount expended under all previous projects prior to the 
adoption of the present project was $85,293.53 for improvement and 
$7,579.39 for maintenance, a total of $92,872.92. 

19. CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA. 

The first examination of Calcasieu Pass was made in 1871. Report 
of this examination was published in Annual Report of Chief of 
Engineers for 1871, page 557. 

The original project based on this report was adopted by the river 
and harbor act approved June 10, 1872, and provides for dredging 
a channel 80 feet wide and 5 feet deep at mean low water through 
the bar in lake near head of Calcasieu Pass. 

This project was modified May 12, 1881, based on report printed 
in House Executive Document No. 46, Forty-sixth Congress, third 
session, and provides for improvement of the river from Philips 



1854 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, TJ. S. ARMY. 

Bluff to its mouth by removing logs, snags, and overhanging trees 
and by dredging, and for dredging bar at head of Calcasieu Pass, 
at an estimated cost of $25,080. 

The river and harbor act of August 5, 1886, authorized the bal- 
ance on hand appropriated for Calcasieu River to be expended on 
Calcasieu Pass, and based on report dated December 8, 1884, pub- 
lished in Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1885, page 
1410, provides for dredging a channel 100 by 6 feet through bar at 
head of Calcasieu Lake, and for channel 100 by 6 feet protected by 
plank revetment on each side at entrance to Calcasieu Pass. Due 
to the destruction of plank revetment by sea worms, the project was 
modified on January 8, 1888 (Annual Report for 1887, p. 125G), to 
omit the revetment. 

In accordance with the project of 1872, a channel was dredged in 
1873-74, redredged in 1882-83, and again in 1886, 1887, and 1888. 
For its protection there was built, in 1886 to 1888, 13,408 linear feet 
of plank revetment before this method of construction was aban- 
doned. 

In addition to this work, excavation of the channel through the 
bar at the mouth of the river was begun in 1887 and completed in 
1888. 

There was expended on the original project and its modifications 
prior to the adoption of the present project the sum of $46,488.05. 

The act of August 5, 1886, ordered an examination of the bars at 
the mouth of the river and pass. Report of this improvement was 
published in Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal 
year ending June 30, 1887, page 1402. This report was the basis 
of the project adopted by the river and harbor act of September 19, 
1890, which, with the improvement of the river, covered by the 
modified original project, constitutes the present project. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENTS OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE GALVESTON, 
TEX., DISTRICT. 



1. GALVESTON HARBOR, TEX. 

With appropriations made July 11, 1870; March 3, 1871 ; and June 
10, 1872, a small dredge boat, two dump scows, and a steam tugboat 
were purchased for use on the inner Galveston Bar, and in 1873 the 
jetties constructed by the citizens of Galveston were repaired and 
strengthened. The river and harbor act of June 23, 1874. adopted the 
project, providing for the securing of a channel 18 feet deep by the 
construction of experimental jetties built of gabions filled with sand, 
at a total estimated cost of $1,759,401.85, appropriating $60,000 for 
beginning the work. (Ex. Doc. No. 136, 43d Cong., 1st sess.) The 
storm of September 15, 1875, destroved a considerable portion of the 
work then in place. To June 30, 1880, a total of $618,431.75 had 
been expended. The project was then modified in 1880 to provide 



APPENDIX. 1855 

for the construction of a jetty gulfward from Bolivar Peninsula, on 
north side of pass, to be built of brush mattresses and stone, with a 
view of securing depth of at least 25 feet over outer bar, at an esti- 
mated cost of $1,825,813. (Annual Eeport for 1880, p. 1221.) In 
1SS3 the available funds becoming exhausted, the city of Galveston 
contributed $100,000 for the purpose of carrying on the work. 

The project was again modified under river and harbor act ap- 
proved August 5, 1886, and enlarged to provide for the construction 
of the north and south jetties 5 feet above low-water level and extend 
same to 30- foot contour in the Gulf, and to do such dredging as may 
be necessary from time to time to obtain a certain depth of 25 feet 
and a possible depth of 30 feet over both bars, at an estimated cost 
of $7,000,000. (H. Ex. Doc. No. 85, 49th Cong., 1st sess.) At this 
time there was a depth of about 20 feet over inner bar and 15 feet 
over outer bar. The U. S. seagoing dredge Gen. C. B. Comstock 
was built at a cost of $86,000 for work on this improvement and 
started work September 26, 1895. 

The expenditures under this project amounted to $7,041,684.42 to 
September 8, 1900, and resulted in obtaining a depth of 26 feet at 
mean low tide on the outer and inner bars, an increase of 14 and 16 
feet, respectively. The south jetty was 35,603 feet long and the north 
jetty 25,907 feet long, 7,000 feet apart at outer ends. The hurricane 
of September 8, 1900, damaged the jetties to a considerable extent 
and cost of repairs was estimated at $1,500,000. (Annual Eeport for 
1901, p. 2018.) These repairs were begun under appropriation of 
June 13, 1902, and completed in 1906. a total of $1,200,000 being ap- 
propriated. To June 30, 1907, a total of $1,141,382.03 had been ex- 
pended under this estimate, of which $261,003.91 was for maintenance 
of improvement. Total expended on all projects to June 30, 1907, 
was $8,519,684.42, of which $8,421,996.57 was for new work and 
$97,687.85 for maintenance. 

2. GALVESTON CHANNEL, TEX. 

The river and harbor act approved June 13, 1902, provided for the 
improvement of this channel from the outer end of the inner bar to 
Fifty-first Street to a depth of 30 feet at mean low tide and of such 
width in the respective portions as shall best subserve the interests 
of commerce, authorizing continuing contracts to the extent of 
$300,000. (H. Doc. No. 264, 56th Cong., 2d sess.) Under this project 
the channel was dredged to depth of 30 feet and width of 550 feet 
from outer end of inner bar to Thirty-first Street, and a width of 200 
feet thence to Forty-fourth Street, and a pile and brush dike built 
parallel to and 1,400 feet distant from the face of the Galveston 
wharves, from a point opposite Tenth Street to Forty-first Street, a 
distance of 21,393 feet, with an -extension built by the Southern 
Pacific Steamship Co., 3,757 feet long, in front of their wharves. 

The river and harbor act approved March 3, 1905, provided for the 
purchase or construction of a hydraulic pipe-line dredge, at a cost 
not to exceed $125,000. This dredge, the Col. A. M. Miller, was pur- 
chased and accepted February 2, 1906, at a cost of $102,500. 

The river and harbor act approved March 2, 1907, provided for the 
extension of the channel from Fifty-first Street to Fifty-sixth Street, 
at an estimated cost of $129,310. (H. Doc. No. 768, 59th Cong., 2d 



1856 EEPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

sess.) A total of $549,675.12 was expended to June 30, 1907, of which 
$501,049.37 was for original work and $48,625.75 was for main- 
tenance. 

3. CHANNEL FROM GALVESTON HARBOR TO TEXAS CITY, TEX. 

Early work of improvement was done by the Texas City Terminal 
Co., who in 1895-96 dredged a channel about 16 feet deep and 100 
feet wide from deep water in Galveston Harbor to the shore, a dis- 
tance of about 7 miles. This channel had shoaled to about original 
condition when work was undertaken by the United States, under the 
river and harbor act approved March 3, 1899, under a project adopted 
for dredging a channel 25 feet deep and 100 feet wide on the bottom, 
at an estimated cost of $250,000. This project was completed under 
contract to June 30, 1905, at cost of $250,000, the Texas City Co. pay- 
ing the cost of superintendence, inspection, etc. 

Under the river and harbor act approved June 25, 1910, the project 
was enlarged in accordance with report printed in House Document 
No. 328, Sixty-first Congress, second session, and provided for main- 
tenance of the channel and deepening to 30 feet and widening to 200 
feet on the bottom, and extending inner end 687 feet, to connect with 
new slip, at an estimated cost of $410,000. A total of $561,905.69 had 
been expended prior to adoption of present project, of which $366,- 
822.48 was for original work and $195,083.21 was for maintenance, 
exclusive of $337,670.17 expended by the Texas City interests, of 
which $16,028.61 was for maintenance of improvement. 

4. CHANNEL TO PORT BOLIVAR, TEX. 

The river and harbor act approved March 2, 1907, appropriated 
$50,000 for work of improvement providing for a channel from deep 
water in Bolivar Roads 25 feet deep at mean low tide and 150 feet 
wide on bottom with increased width in front of wharf of Gulf ft 
Interstate Railway, the total length being about 4,275 feet. This 
project was completed June 14, 1909, at a cost of $48,710.75, the 
width in front of wharf being 600 feet. (H. Doc. No. 719. 59th Cong., 
1st sess.) A total of $94,811.50 had been expended, of which $48,- 
710.75 was for new work and $46,100.75 for maintenance. 

5. HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TEX. 

Survey of this waterway was made in 1871 with a view of securing 
a channel 6 feet deep and 100 feet wide. First work undertaken by 
the Government with its own plant under appropriation approved 
June 10, 1872, was a cut through Red Fish Bar 7$ feet deep and 70 
feet wide and 1,500 feet long. With appropriation of June 23. 1874, 
this cut was extended a distance of 2,982 feet and 60 feet wide. A 
further appropriation on March 3, 1875, of $10,200 provided for the 
deepening of cut to 10 feet and widening to 150 feet. Under same 
date an appropriation of $25,000 was made to improve ship channel 
between mouth of San Jacinto River and Bolivar Channel to be 
considered an extension of the Red Fish Cut. The Red Fish Cut was 
deepened to 14^ feet for a distance of 6,100 feet connecting with 9 
and 8£ feet depths in bay. Appropriation of $72,000 was made 



APPENDIX. 1857 

available on April 25, 1877, but action was deferred pending decision 
of Congress as to route of channel as reported on by board of engi- 
neers under date of September 10, 1877, and printed in Annual Report 
of Chief of Engineers for 1877, pages 459—168. The act of Congress 
approved June 18, 1878, appropriated an additional $75,000 and 
provided that the amounts were to be expended between Red Fish 
Bar and Bolivar Channel. Under contract a channel was dredged 12 
feet deep and 100 feet wide during 1879-80. An appropriation of 
$80,000 was made by act of Congress approved March, 1879, for im- 
provement of channel between Red Fish Bar and Morgan Canal 
subject to certain conditions to be complied with by the Buffalo 
Bayou Ship Channel Co., a private corporation which had dredged 
a canal through Morgan Point and for a distance of about 4.8 miles 
into Galveston Bay, the question involving collection of tolls by this 
company. 

Under title of "Improving Buffalo Bgryou," work of snagging, 
cutting overhanging trees, and dredging of shoals between mouth of 
White Oak Bayou at foot of Main Street, Houston, and the mouth of 
Simms Bayou, about 10 miles below Houston, was begun under ap- 
propriation approved March 3, 1881, a total of $95,522.13 being ex- 
pended to June 30, 1885. 

The river and harbor act of July 5, 1884, provided that no further 
work be done in Galveston Bay until the Secretary of War shall be 
satisfied that the Buffalo Bayou Ship Channel Co. has relinquished 
or abandoned to the United States all the franchises and any and all 
right to collect or impose tolls or charges from any part of said 
ship channel or Buffalo Bayou. The river and harbor act of August 
5, 1886, omitted the condition required of the Buffalo Bayou Ship 
Channel Co. and provided for continuation of the work on channel 
and suitably marking same. The channel having deteriorated to 
about its original condition, work was begun under contract to dredge 
channel 12 feet deep and 100 feet wide between Bolivar Channel and 
Red Fish Bar, which was completed July 20, 1889. A small amount 
of snagging and dredging of shoals was also done in the upper section 
of Buffalo^Bayou from 1888 to 1892. 

On May 4, 1892, the Morgan Canal and Cut was purchased by the 
United States from the Buffalo Bayou Ship Channel Co. for*$92,- 
316.85, the value being appraised by board of commissioners ap- 
pointed under authority of the river and harbor act approved Sep- 
tember 19, 1890. The route of the channel was then changed from 
connection with mouth of San Jacinto River over Cloppers Bar, to 
connect with canal and cut dredged through Morgan Point by private 
parties at its lower end, near Morgan Beacon, 4.8 miles from Morgan 
Point, and a channel was dredged under contract 9i feet deep and 
150 feet wide between Morgan Beacon and Red Fish Bar, with cut 
12 feet deep and 75 feet wide along center of 150-foot channel. The 
banks of canal at Morgan Point were graded and a sheet-pile bulk- 
head revetment built 1,959 feet long. A small amount of dredging 
and snagging was done in upper section of the bayou under contract. 
Amount expended prior to existing project to June 30, 1898, ship 
channel in Galveston Bay (including purchase of Morgan Canal and 
Cut, $92,316.85), $800,328.16, and Buffalo Bayou, Tex., $210,137.64; 
a total of $1,010,465.80. 

8373°— eng 1915 117 



1858 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

6. WEST GALVESTON BAY CHANNEL, TURTLE BAYOU, TRINITY 
RIVER, ANAHUAO CHANNEL, OYSTER CREEK, CEDAR, CHOCOLATE, 
AND BASTROP BAYOUS, TEX., INCLUDING MOUTHS OF ADJACENT 
STREAMS. 

This project has embraced the improvement of the following 
localities: West Galveston Bay, the Galveston & Brazos Canal, 
Hanna Eeef (East Bay Bayou), Double Bayou, Anahuac Channel, 
mouth of Trinity River, Turtle Bayou, Cedar Bayou, Clear Creek, 
Dickinson Bayou, Chocolate Bayou, Bastrop Bayou, Oyster Creek. 
(Annual Report for 1900, p. 2438.) 

Prior to March 3, 1899, the improvement of West Galveston Bay 
and the Galveston & Brazos Canal, Double Bayou, mouth of Trinity 
River, and Cedar Bayou were independent. The river and harbor act 
of that date made an appropriation for the improvement of the 
Brazos River between Velasco and Richmond, West Galveston Bay 
Channel, Double Bayou, and the mouths of adjacent streams. The 
mouth of Trinity River and Cedar Bayou were transferred to this 
work, and Anahuac Channel was added by the act of March 3, 1905. 
Chocolate and Bastrop Bayous were added by the act of March 2, 
1907, and Turtle Bayou and Oyster Creek by the act of June 25, 
1910. As adjacent streams, Hanna Reef (East Bay Bayou), Clear 
Creek, and Dickinson Bayou have been improved. Double Bayou 
has not been specially named in the act since 1905 and is now under 
improvement as an adjacent stream. The Brazos River between 
Velasco and Richmond, which was included in the improvement for 
a time, is now covered by a separate appropriation. 

The object of this improvement, in part, is to obtain and maintain 
a navigable channel depth of from 4 to 6 feet across the bars at the 
mouths of the streams and bayous from deep water in the bay to 
deep water in the bayous. The improvement is intended to develop 
a light-draft inland navigation which will afford cheap transpor- 
tation by light-draft steamers and barges to the coast country of 
Texas. The estimated cost of the modified project has been given 
in previous reports as $248,646.34, but as works originally embraced 
in this project have been transferred to other appropriations and 
new works have been added for which no estimates of cost have been 
made, there is no estimated cost for the entire project. All the 
channels called for have been completed, but maintenance is regu- 
larly required. More and larger boats, especially power boats with 
schooner hulls, have been built to utilize the improvement. Most 
of these boats are owned by private parties and are not in regular 
commercial service, and no satisfactory records of tonnage can be 
obtained. Most of the points reached are settlements not on rail- 
roads, and the improvements are of great importance to their com- 
mercial life. The effect of these improvements has been generally to 
decrease freight rates to all points reached by the channels improved. 

By authority of river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, a pipe- 
line hydraulic dredge was constructed for the improvement of these 
streams at a cost of $67,992.51. This dredge. General II. M. Robert, 
was burned April 18, 1909, and the dredging was carried on by the 
dredge Captain G. W. Howell. The latter, however, was lost at sea 
September 14, 1911, and, there being no other Government plant 



APPENDIX. 1859 

arailable for maintenance of the light-draft projects, the hydraulic 
dredge Xo. S was purchased from the Bowers Southern Dredging Co., 
of Galveston, Tex., for $29,500 for use on this and the inland water- 
way work. This dredge was renamed the San Bernard, and has 
been engaged on maintenance of the light-draft projects since x\pril 
16, 1913. The amount expended prior to operations under existing 
project was $108,050. 

(d) MOUTH OF TRINITY RIVER, TEX. 

Project for improvement was adopted by river and harbor act 
approved June 18, 1878, and provided for the removal of snags 
from the river below Liberty, about 30 miles above the mouth, and in 
dredging a channel 6 feet deep at mean low tide and 80 feet wide 
across the bar at mouth of the pass then in use by vessels, at an 
estimated cost of $22,581.40. (Annual Eeport for 1873, p. 685.) 
This project was amended by river and harbor act approved May 4, 
1884, and provided for the erection of two parallel jetties, or wooden 
revetments, at month known as Middle Pass, 275 feet apart and 
extending about 7,750 feet into upper Galveston Bay ; also in closing 
the other two principal passes by submerged dams, to create and 
maintain a channel about 6 feet deep at mean low tide at the mouth 
of the river, at an estimated cost of $89,500. A total of $69,444.76 
had been expended on the project to June 30, 1889. 

7. INLAND WATERWAY ON THE COAST OF TEXAS. 

(a) WEST GALVESTON BAT AND BRAZOS RIVER CANAL. 

Previous to 1908 the improvement of these channels was carried 
on under appropriations for " channel in West Galveston Bay, Tex.," 
and " improvement of Brazos River between Velasco and Richmond, 
West Galveston Bay Channel, Double Bayou, and the mouths of 
adjacent streams." The project adopted by the river and harbor act 
of July 13, 1892, provided for widening, deepening and straight- 
ening the channel by dredging, so as to afford a least width of 200 
feet and depth of 3J feet between the railroad bridges and San Luis 
Pass in the bay, and a least width of 100 feet and depth of 3 feet 
along Christmas Point, and to suitably mark the channel with 
beacons, at a total estimated cost of $28,998.80. (H. Ex. Doc. No. 22, 
52d Cong., 1st sess.) This project was modified by river and harbor 
act approved July 8, 1896, to provide for deepening the channel to 
5 feet, provided the cost were not increased. 

The Galveston & Brazos Canal had been dredged by private par- 
ties in 1851-53, from the Brazos River to Oyster Bay, a distance 
of about 10 miles. This canal was 100 feet wide and about 6 feet 
deep, and afforded an inland passage for light-draft boats between 
Galveston and the Brazos River. Under the river and harbor act 
approved June 13, 1902, this canal was purchased by the United 
States at a cost of $30,000, to form a link in the chain of inland 
waterways. (See H. Doc. No. 89, 54th Cong. 2d sess.) 



1860 KEPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 
9. MOUTH OF BRAZOS RIVER. TEX. 

Work of improvement was begun under river and harbor act 
approved June 14, 1880, which provided for the construction of 
jetties to obtain a navigable channel across the bar at the mouth of 
the river, at an estimated cost of $246,484, which was revised in 1881 
to $442,890.40. To 1889 the work consisted in construction of a 
north jetty of brush mattresses and stone 2,433 feet long and a 
foundation partly completed for shore end of south jetty, a total of 
$142,098.43 being expended. The work was then suspended. 

Under the river and harbor act approved August 9, 1888, the 
Brazos River Channel & Dock Co., a private corporation chartered 
under the laws of the State of Texas February 16, 1888, was au- 
thorized to construct, own, and operate jetties and other auxiliary 
works for the purpose of creating a" navigable channel at the mouth 
of the Brazos Eiver. This company constructed two parallel jetties 
560 feet apart, the northeast jetty 4,708 feet long and the southeast 
jetty 5,018 feet long. This work having failed to accomplish the 
desired results, and the company not being financially able to proceed 
with the work, the river and harbor act approved June 3, 1896, pro- 
vided for the appointment of a board of engineers to report on the 
character and value of the improvements made by the company, 
appropriating $5,000 for the expense of this investigation and report. 
(S. Doc. No. 138, 54th Cong., 2d sess.) 

The river and harbor act approved March 3, 1899, contained the 
following item : 

Mouth of Brazos River, Texas : For dredging and such other work as may 
be deemed most effective in the judgment of the Secretary of War in im- 
proving and developing the harbor, eighty-five thousand dollars: Provided, 
That no part of said sum shall be expended until the Brazos River Channel and 
Dock Company shall file with the Secretary of War a transfer to the United 
States of the jetties and auxiliary works, also a release of all rights and 
privileges conferred upon said company by its charter or by the act of Congress 
approved August ninth, eighteen hundred and eighty-eight, to charge or col- 
lect tolls for the use and navigation of said river ; and the Secretary of War is 
directed to have an examination made of the mouth of the Brazos and the 
jetties, and report to Congress the estimated cost of extending the jetties one- 
half mile, and the estimated depth and width of the channel to be obained by 
such extension, and the estimated cost of obtaining twenty feet of water and a 
channel one hundred and fifty feet wide. 

The Brazos River Channel & Dock Co. on April 25, 1899, released 
all rights and privileges previously conferred, and the United States 
resumed work of improvement on July 11, 1899, with a project to 
strengthen the jetties, construct spur dikes and bank protection, and 
to dredge a channel 18 feet deep and 150 feet wide, at an estimated 
cost of $250,000, which was increased by $175,000 after the hurricane 
of September 8, 1900. (H. Doc. 652, 56th Cong., 1st sess.) The 
project is completed. 

10. BRAZOS RIVER, TEX., FROM VELASCO TO OLD WASHINGTON. 

The work of improvement was begun under project adopted by 
river and harbor act approved June 3, 1896, which provided for 
the removal of snags and overhanging trees, and the dredging of 
the troublesome shoals between Velasco and Richmond only, with 
an appropriation of $5,000. 



APPENDIX. 1861 

13. PORT ARANSAS, TEX. 

Work of improvement was begun in 1869 by the citizens of Rock- 
port and Corpus Christi, who raised by subscription about $10,000, 
which was expended under direction of a Mr. Halliday in building 
a light crib- work jetty about 600 feet long from the shore line of 
St. Joseph Island across a secondary channel. Apparently as a 
result of this work the secondary channel shoaled about 2 feet and 
the main channel was deepened 2 feet. Wave action and the teredo 
soon destroyed this structure. 

Improvement by the United States began under river and harbor 
act of March 3, 1879, which appropriated $35,000 to be expended 
under plan printed in Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers, 
1879, page 928, et seq., which provided for obtaining a channel 12 
feet deep across the bar, and, if funds permitted, the protection of 
head of Mustang Island from erosion. The report of board of engi- 
neers, printed in Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers, 1880, 
page 1260, contemplated the construction of two parallel jetties about 
3,000 feet apart extending into the Gulf of Mexico from the south 
end of St. Joseph Island and the north end of Mustang Island; the 
protection of the north end of Mustang Island from erosion by con- 
struction of groins in conjunction with a beach flooring of mattresses 
and the planting of trees on St. Joseph Island for its protection 
against abrasion by winds, at an estimated cost of $759,185. Under 
this project the head of Mustang Island was protected by groins and 
mattresses; sand fences were built on St. Joseph and Mustang 
Islands, and the partial construction of south jetty from head of 
Mustang Island for a distance of 5,500 feet. No north jetty was 
built. Work suspended in April, 1885. A storm in September, 
1885, damaged the work seriously. 

The project was modified July 25, 1887, by the Chief of Engi- 
neers as recommended by the Board of Engineers in their report of 
July 19, 1887, and printed in Annual Report of the Chief of Engi- 
neers, 1888, page 1312, et seq., so as to provide for the construction of 
two parallel jetties 2,000 feet apart out to the 20-foot curve, the 
jetties to be constructed of stone 12 feet wide on top at inner end 
and increasing to 24 feet wide at outer end, with a crest of 5 feet 
above mean low tide, and the protection of the north end of Mustang 
Island with riprap 18 inches thick extending from high water to the 
bottom, or nearly to bottom of channel, all at an estimated cost of 
$1,688,500. The Chief of Engineers directed that the existing funds 
be used in the protection of head of Mustang Island, which was com- 
pleted. No work was done on the jetties for want of funds, and in 
1890 the project was undertaken by the Aransas Pass Harbor Co. 

The Aransas Pass Harbor Co., a private corporation, chartered 
under the laws of the State of Texas, was granted certain rights and 
privileges under a special act approved May 12, 1890, and they con- 
structed sections of jetties on each side of the pass, that section on 
the north side being a curved reaction jetty, detached from the shore. 
As their plans failed to secure the desired results they relinquished 
their rights on March 27, 1899, as provided for under the river and 
harbor act approved March 3, 1899, the United States taking over 
the further work of improvement and completing the north jetty 



1862 TiEPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

under the plans and specifications of the Aransas Pass Harbor Co. 
as provided for by the river and harbor act approved June 13, 19Q2, 
and the river and harbor act approved March 3, 1905, at a cost to the 
United States of $546,703.10. 

The river and harbor act approved March 2, 1907, provided for 
the construction of a south jetty parallel to the general direction 
of the existing north jett}^ and the extension shoreward of the north 
jetty to connect with St. Joseph Island, and later the extension of 
both jetties, to obtain a depth of 20 feet, in accordance with plana 
submitted by the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, pub- 
lished in Rivers and Harbors Committee Document No. 5, Fifty- 
ninth Congress, second session, at an estimated cost of $1,288,699.50. 
including $100,000 for a dredge. Under the river and harbor act of 
June 25, 1910, in accordance with report submitted in House Docu- 
ment No. 639, Sixty-first Congress, second session, the project was 
extended to cover the repairing of the north jetty, dredging and 
removal of obstructions in the channel, and was diminished by omit- 
ting the seaward extension of 1,750 feet of the jetties, the revised 
estimate being $1,157,500. 

The river and harbor act approved February 27, 1911, adopted the 
project printed in House Document No. 1901, Sixty-first Congress, 
third session, which provides for a deep-water harbor to be estab- 
lished between Harbor Island and St. Joseph Island, the harbor to 
be 20 feet deep, with a width of 1,200 feet, for a distance of 3,000 
feet from the upper end of the pass, and to extend thence with the 
same depth 400 feet wide from the north end for a distance of 5.420 
feet, together with a protective stone dike 10,000 feet long, to be built 
on St. Joseph Island, connecting with the north jetty, all at an esti- 
mated cost of $375,000, with $25,000 annually for maintenance after 
completion. This act also provided that no part of the appropria- 
tion and authorization should be expended until the Secretary of 
War is satisfied that the interests of the general public will be duly 
protected in the use of the harbor and that no terminal monopoly 
will be possible, and that the title and easements in any land needed 
in the construction of the dike proposed as a part of the improve- 
ment shall have been invested in the United States free of cost. 
These conditions have been met. The dike on St. Joseph Island 
was constructed and deep-water harbor dredged to depth of '20 feet 
at mean low tide, with the extension from north end 150 to 400 
feet wide for a distance of 2,000 feet, there not being sufficient funds 
to complete to full width and length. Dredging between jetties was 
done with Government plant. 

14. CHANNEL FROM ARANSAS PASS TO CORPUS CHRISTI, TEX. 

The river and harbor act of March 2. 1907. provided for the im- 
provement of this locality under the title of "Turtle Cove Channel 
between Aransas Pass and Corpus Christi, Tex.." appropriating a 
total of $123,750 with which to dredge a channel S\ feet deep at mean 
low tide, and 75 feet wide on the bottom, between Aransas Pass and 
Corpus Christi Bay. This channel was completed in 1909 and partly 
redredged in 1910, at a total cost of $126,723.57, of which $122,552.14 
was for original work and $4,171.43 was for maintenance. 



APPENDIX. 1863 

HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE DALLAS, TEX., 
DISTRICT. 



2. MOUTHS OF SABINE AND NECHES RIVERS, TEX. 

Under a project for the Sabine River, La. and Tex., adopted by 
the river and harbor act of June 18, 1878, based on reports of surveys 
dated April 28,^1871, and July 28, 1873 (Annual Report for 1871, p. 
540, and for 1873, p. 681), which in part provided for the dredging 
of a channel through the bar for the use of 5-foot boats at an esti- 
mated cost of $13,000.33, a channel was dredged in 1879 and 1880 
6 feet deep at mean low water and 70 to 100 feet wide. This channel 
was redredged in 1883 and 1896, the latter work being done under a 
diversion of $4,000 from the appropriation for Sabine Pass author- 
ized by the sundry civil act of March 4, 1895. The total amount 
spent on the improvement was approximately $24,000. 

Under a project for the improvement of the Neches River, Tex., 
adopted by the river and harbor act of June 18, 1878 (based on a 
report of survey dated November 22, 1873 — Annual Report for 1874, 
p. 474 — in which a channel across the bar 5 feet deep and 80 feet 
wide, at an estimated cost of $26,318.05, was recommended), a chan- 
nel was dredged in 1880, 5 feet deep at mean low water, 30 to 60 
feet wide. This channel was redredged in 1889 and again in 1896, 
a channel 50 feet wide and 6 feet deep being secured in the latter year. 
The total amount expended was approximately $24,750. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1889, appropriated $10,000 
for " improving the mouths of Sabine and Neches Rivers," and for 
the expenses of making a reexamination by a board of engineers of 
the proposed channel through Sabine Lake. This appropriation was 
apparently based on the survey of February 11, 1897 (report printed 
in H. Doc. No. 299, 54th Cong., 2d sess., in which an 8-foot channel 
150 feet wide from the 8-foot contour in Sabine Pass to deep water 
in the Sabine and Neches Rivers was recommended). The sum of 
$113.01 was spent for the reexamination of the project by the board, 
and $9,812.28 in dredging a 60-foot channel 8 feet deep from the 7-foot 
contour of the Neches River to the 6-foot contour of Sabine Lake, 
and a 60-foot channel 7 feet deep from the 6-foot contour of the 
Sabine River to the 6-foot contour of Sabine Lake. 

4. HARBOR AT SABINE PASS AND PORT ARTHUR CANAL, TEX. 

The first project for work at this harbor was based on a report by 
the district officer dated February 4, 1875 (Annual Report, for 1875, 
p. 1945), submitted under instructions from the Chief of Engineers. 
It was inferentially adopted by the act of March 3, 1875. It pro- 
vided for dredging a channel across the bar 12 feet deep, 150 feet 
wide, 2-J miles long, at an estimated cost of $105,026. Dredging 
by contract was carried on during the fiscal years 1876 and 1877, and 
by the U. S. dredge Essay oris (apparently with the intention of ob- 
taining 20 feet depth) during the fiscal years 1878, 1879, and 1881. 
In addition to the dredging on the bar, a 15-foot channel across the 
reef that separated the harbor of Sabine City from the roadstead in- 
side the outer bar, was dredged. The desired channel depth across 



1864 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

the bar, though secured at different times, was not maintained. The 
total expenditures under this project were $161,703.94. The remain- 
ing balance of $151,296.06 was applied to the next project. 

The second project was based on a report of the district officer 
dated January 28, 1882 (published as H. Doc. No. 147, 47th Cong., 
1st sess). This project called for two brush-and-stone jetties, 1,800 
feet apart, to extend across the bar to 18 feet depth of water, to be 
built to mean low water, the west jetty to be 18,120 feet long and the 
east jetty 19,800 feet long; also, if necessary, dredging a channel 20 
feet by 100 feet, at a total estimated cost of $3,177,606.50, of which 
$160,000 was for dredging. The project was inferentially adopted 
by the act of August 2, 1882. Work on this project was commenced 
in January, 1883, the west jetty being started first. The east jetty 
was started in March, 1885. In 1891, it was decided to raise por- 
tions of the jetties to 2 feet above mean high water and to abandon 
the use of alternate layers of brush and small stone above the brush 
foundation. Dredging was started in 1893 and carried on until 

1896. At the close of the fiscal year 1896 the east jetty had been built 
to a total length of 19,500 feet, of which 17,100 feet had been com- 
pleted and 2,400 feet was under construction; the west jetty was 
14,875 feet long, of which 6,609 feet was raised to 2 feet above mean 
high water, 7,966 feet to mean low water, the remaining 300 feet 
being foundation work. The channel had a depth of 24 feet and an 
average width of 100 feet, the total amount of material removed 
by dredging having been 1,276,631.74 cubic yards. The total ex- 
penditures had been $1,834,838.08. 

By the act of June 30, 1896, this project was modified to the extent 
of authorizing a continuing contract of $1,050,000, which, added to 
the amounts already made available, apparently limited the total 
cost of the project to $2,996,046.06, but in addition to this $130,000 
was appropriated for the construction and operation of a dredge boat 
in the act of June 4, 1897, and $150,000 by the act of March 3, 1899, 
for improving the main ship channel inside the harbor between a 
point 1,000 feet north of the United States life-saving station and a 
point opposite the lighthouse. The project approved by the Secre- 
tary of War December 8, 1896, under the continuing contract authori- 
zation of that year, provided for constructing 5,300 linear feet, more 
or less, of the east jetty, and 6,600 linear feet, more or less, of the west 
jetty, and for deepening the channel by dredging. A contract for this 
work was approved June 22, 1897, work was commenced August 10, 

1897, and the jetty work under this contract completed on August 6, 
1900. The condition of the jetties at this time was as follows: The 
east jetty had been extended to a length of 25,100 feet, of which 
21,540 feet was capped, 960 feet was riprap, and 2,600 feet was 
foundation only; and the west jetty to 22,000 feet, of which 15,250 
feet was capped, 1,800 feet was riprap, and 4,950 feet Avas foundation 
only. Dredging in the channel under contract was carried on in the 
fiscal years 1898 and 1899, approximately 700,000 cubic yards being 
removed. Dredging in the channel was also carried on under con- 
tract from November 28, 1900, to January 3, 1901, with an allotment 
of $8,000 from the emergency appropriation of June 6, 1900, 61,538 
cubic yards being removed. The dredge /Sabine, built under the au- 
thorization for the construction of a dredge, was completed in Janu- 
ary, 1901, and dredged from February 9 to June 30, 1901, from 



APPENDIX. 1865 

October 28, 1901, to January 15, 1902, and from February 17, 1902 
to June 30, 1902, removing, approximately, 470,000 cubic yards of 
material. The work during the last two periods was carried on under 
an allotment of $2,000 from the emergency appropriation of June 6, 
1900, and with funds contributed by the Kansas City Southern Kail- 
way, respectively. The work of dredging in. the inner harbor under 
the appropriation of March 3, 1899, was begun in 1899, and up to 
June 30, 1902, 822,830 cubic yards had been removed, the work being 
six-tenths completed. The available depth between the jetties was 22 
feet. The total amount expended under this revision of the project 
to June 30, 1902, was $1,358,357.18. Of the appropriation of $130,000 
of 1897, $16,297.03 reverted to the Treasury. 

In the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal 
year ending June 30, 1901, page 1911, it was reported that there had 
been an unusual and unexpected amount of settlement of the jetties, 
and that additional work was desirable beyond that contemplated 
by the project of 1896 to secure the full benefits of the improve- 
ment. A revised estimate for completing the jetties "to their origi- 
nally projected length and height " was given, amounting to $1,116,573. 
This report also contained (p. 1919) a special report on the damage 
to the jetties by the hurricane of September, 1900 (also printed in 
H. Doc. No. 152, 56th Cong., 2d sess.). The cost of repairing this 
damage was given as $100,000. This amount, however, was also 
included in the $1,116,573 above referred to. This report also con- 
tained (on p. 1915) a report on preliminary examination and survey 
for widening and deepening to 24 feet the channel from a point 
about 1,000 feet north of the life-saving station to the entrance to the 
Port Arthur Canal at a cost of $25,000 (printed in H. Doc. No. 70, 
56th Cong., 2d sess.). The act of June 13, 1902, specifically adopted 
this latter project, and by inference in connection with subsequent 
appropriations adopted the project for completing the jetties at a 
cost of $1,116,573. The work on the inner channel to a point 1,000 
feet above the life-saving station, begun in 1899, was completed in 
April, 1903, and the work of dredging the channel from that point 
to the entrance of the Port Arthur Canal was completed February 
27, 1903. The dredge Sabine worked yearly in the jetty channel, 
removing up to June 30, 1912, 3,812,351 cubic yards under this proj- 
ect. Jetty work was carried on whenever funds were available. On 
the east jetty 214,791.37 tons of stone were placed, and in addition 
1,455 granite capping blocks, which were taken from the west jetty; 
on the west jetty 50,873.73 tons of riprap and 7,094.72 tons of coping 
stone were placed; also 10,871.69 cubic yards of concrete placed as 
coping. The condition, of the jetties on July 1, 1912, was substan- 
tially as follows : The east jetty was completed to 4 feet above mean 
low gulf level for about 14,300 feet, built up to about mean low gulf 
level for about 8,100 feet, and mattress foundation placed, but 
partly destroyed, for about 3,000 feet. The west jetty was completed 
to 4 feet above mean low gulf level for about 15,800 feet, built to 
about mean low gulf level for about 1,200 feet, and mattress founda- 
tion placed, but partly destroyed, for about 4,000 feet. The approxi- 
mate amount expended was $1,192,948.99, of which approximately 
$830,000 was applied to the jetties. The amounts expended for new 
work and for maintenance can not be accurately separated. It was 
estimated that $708,434.01 had been expended in maintenance of all 



1866 



REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 



jetty projects. There was an available depth of 25 feet through the 
channel. 

The Port Arthur Ship Canal was dug to 25 feet depth during the 
years 1897 and 1899 by the Port Arthur Channel & Dock Co., a 
subsidiary of the Kansas City Southern Railway Co. This rail- 
road, which was then building, desired to construct docks farther 
inland than Sabine Pass, and accordingly selected a site near where 
Taylors Bayou empties into Sabine Lake. A slip, a lumber basin. 
and a turning basin were excavated at this point. In 1902 it be- 
came necessary to redredge the canal for nearly its entire length, 
and this work was completed in March, 1903. The channel and 
dock company then built a dredge, which was operated in main- 
taining the canal for over three j'ears. Under the provisions of an 
act of Congress approved June 29, 1906, the Port Arthur Ship Canal, 
lumber, and turning basins, together with a strip of land along the 
canal, were conveyed to the United States free of cost. The deed 
of conveyance from the Port Arthur Channel & Dock Co. was ac- 
cepted by the Secretary of War on December 13, 1906, from which 
date the canal became a public waterway of the United States. Ces- 
sion of jurisdiction over the property was executed by the governor of 
the State of Texas on February 27, 1907. A survey of the canal was 
completed May 10, 1907. The following table gives a summary of 
the condition of the canal at the time of its acceptance by the United 
States : 





Length. 


Average 

top 
width. 


Width 
between 

20-foot 
contours. 


Maximum 
depth. 


Minimum 

depth. 




Feet. 

37,600 
1,800 
1,200 


Feel. 
200 
625 
160 


Feet. 
80 
530 
100 


Fett. 
25.1 
27.1 
26.2 


Feet. 
22.0 








23.1 







The dredge Port Arthur, previously in use by the company, was 
purchased, and operations for the maintenance of the canal and 
basins were carried on under the permanent indefinite appropriation 
for operating and care of canals and other works of navigation to 
the time of the adoption of the project of July 25, 1912, which com- 
bined the improvement of the Port Arthur Canal with the improve- 
ment of the harbor at Sabine Pass. The dredge Port Arthur having 
become worn out, was dismantled, and a new hydraulic pipe-line 
dredge (the Orange) was constructed, at a cost of $84,520, and de- 
livered in May, 1912. The total amount expended on the maintenance 
of the Port Arthur Canal to June 30, 1912, was $267,112.63. 

10. RED RIVER, BETWEEN FULTON, ARK., AND THE MOUTH OF THE 
WASHITA RIVER, OKLA. 

The original project for the Red River above Fulton was adopted 
bv the following provision of the river and harbor act of August 5, 
1886: 

Improving Red River, Ark., above Fulton, Ark., $7,000. 



APPENDIX. 1867 

It was evidently based on the survey ordered by the river and har- 
bor act of July 5, 1885, report of which was published in Annual 
Report of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year ending June 30, 
1885, page 1617. It provided for the improvement of navigation at 
medium and high stages to the mouth of the Kiamichi River, 158 
miles above Fulton, by the removal of snags and drift. The esti- 
mated cost was $10,000. No estimate for maintenance was given. 
Work was begun in the fiscal year 1888 and carried on until 1891, 
when the project was reported as practically completed. The amount 
expended was $13,273.82, including $1,500 received from the sale of 
a snag boat. The work was not of a permanent character, and under 
subsequent appropriations work of maintenance was carried on until 
1905, $20,226.18 having been expended, making a total of $33,500 
for this project. All work had been done by hired labor and Gov- 
ernment plant, the latter generally belonging to the improvement of 
Red River below Fulton. 

By the following provision of the river and harbor act of March 3, 
1905: 

Improving Red River in the States of Louisiana, Arkansas, and Texas and 
Indian Territory : For continuing improvement and for maintenance, $200,000 : 
Provided, That of this amount $100,000 may be expended between Pulton, Ark., 
and Denison, Tex. — 

the project was extended to include that portion of the river from the 
mouth of the Kiamichi to Denison, 123 miles, making the total length 
under improvement 281 miles. No estimate of the cost of this im- 
provement had been made. The project is stated in the Annual 
Report of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year ending June 30, 
1896, and in subsequent reports, as contemplating " the removal of 
drift and snags, clearing the banks of timber in danger of caving into 
the river, and closing chutes and cut-offs where necessary." Work 
under this modified project was carried on until 1912, a total of 
$315,029.20 having been expended. All work was carried on by 
hired labor, a steam snag boat, the G . A. Culberson, and a number of 
quarter boats having been constructed. 

Under the following provision of the river and harbor act of June 
25,1910: 

Improving Red River, La., Ark., Tex., and Okla. : Continuing improvement 
and for maintenance below Fulton, Ark., $75,000; continuing improvement and 
for maintenance between Fulton, Ark., and Denison, Tex., $50,000: Provided. 
That of this latter amount so much as shall be necessary may, in the discretion 
of the Secretary of War, be expended for removing snags and other obstruc- 
tions in the lower 25 miles of the Kiamichi River, a tributary of Red River, in 
the State of Oklahoma — 

and the general provision contained in the act of July 25, 1912, 
authorizing the Chief of Engineers after approval by the Secretary 
of War to remove snags from tributaries of waterways already under 
Federal improvement, the lower 25 miles of the Kiamichi River 
were snagged in the fiscal years 1912 and 1913 at a total cost of 
$3,854.07, which is included in the figures above given for the Red 
River. 

11. SULPHUR RIVER, TEX. AND ARK. 

The first project for the improvement of Sulphur River was 
adopted by the river and harbor act of August 18, 1894, which author- 



1868 KEPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

ized the use of $5,000 from the appropriation for improving Red 
River, " for improving the Sulphur River, a tributary of the Red 
River." This project was evidently based on a report on the pre- 
liminary examination ordered by the river and harbor act of July 
13, 1892, in which it was recommended that the lower portion of the 
river up to Sulphur Station (31 miles from the mouth) be cleared 
of snags and other obstructions. No estimate of cost was given. In 
1896 and 1897, $2,488.99 of this appropriation was spent in snagging 
the river to the Kansas City Southern Railway bridge, mile 26. At 
the conclusion of this work the river was reported as having been 
put " in fair navigable condition at ordinary stages." The balance of 
the appropriation reverted to the funds for the general improvement 
of Red River under the authority contained in the act of June 13, 
1902. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OP PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE VICKSBURG, 
MISS., DISTRICT. 



RED RIVER, LA. AND ARK., BELOW FULTON, ARK. 

The original project for this improvement was adopted by act of 
Congress approved May 23, 1828, and betAveen that date and 1841 
more than $425,000 was appropriated for the removal of the great 
Red River raft. This obstruction consisted of a mass of sunken logs 
and stumps filling the entire channel of the river and extending a 
distance of 92 miles from Loggy Bayou, 65 miles below Shreveport. 
La., to Hurricane BluJEfs, 27 miles above. A channel was opened 
through the raft, but owing to the failure of appropriations between 
1841 and 1852 another raft formed. By river and harbor act of 
August 30, 1852, $100,000 was appropriated and the river was opened 
to commerce. This amount, however, was not sufficient to complete 
the work, and in 1857 a recommendation was made that $50,000 a 
year be appropriated for completion and maintenance. Xo more 
funds were provided, however, until 1872, and in the interval the 
greater portion of the result of the former work was lost. 

When work was resumed in 1872 the river above Shreveport, La., 
was closed by a raft 32 miles long, which was constantly increasing. 
Below Shreveport the enlargement of an outlet through Tones 
Bayou depleted the main channel and threatened to render it un- 
navigable. The falls at Alexandria, La., caused by a ledge of rock 
extending across the stream, were impassable at low stages. The chan- 
nel of the river frequently changed its location and the constant 
caving of the heavily timbered banks brought numerous snags and 
logs into the stream, which made navigation difficult and dangerous 
throughout the entire river at all stages of water. 

The project adopted by river and harbor act of June 10, 1872 
(based on report printed in S. Ex. Doc. Xo. 71, 42d Cong., 2d sess.), 
contemplated opening a channel for navigation through the raft at 
an estimated.cost of $259,014 and from $10,000 to $50,000 per annum 
for maintenance and closing Tones Bayou outlet. River and harbor 
act of June 18, 1878, provided funds for removal of wrecks, snags, 
and other obstructions from the river below Shreveport, and the 



APPENDIX. 1869 

same kind of work was directed for the part of the stream above the 
head of the raft to Fulton by the act of March 3, 1879 (based ap- 
parently on report printed in S. Ex. Doc. No. 42, 45th Cong., 3d 
sess.). A channel was cleared through the raft in 1872-73, and sub- 
sequent work prevented new formations of the same nature, in- 
creased the width of the river 100 feet or more, and greatly improved 
the navigable channel. This work also lowered the bed of the stream 
and relieved vast- areas of fertile land from overflow. Several at- 
tempts were made to close Tones Bayou outlet, but owing to the 
inadequate funds and the determined opposition of residents of the 
vicinity the}' did not succeed. This outlet, however, gradually filled 
from natural causes, and was finally closed by the parish levee board. 
By the river and harbor act of August 2, 1882, the entire river 
from Fulton, Ark., to the Atchafalaya River, La., was included in 
one project. Under the river and harbor act of July 5, 1884, the 
revetment of the bank at Alexandria, La., and the closure of Sale 
and Murphy outlet were authorized. The river and harbor act of 
August 5, 1886, directed a complete survey of the portion of Red 
Eiver included in the project and also a survey of Bayou Pierre, La. 
The improvement of Cypress Bayou and the lakes between Shreve- 
port, La., and Jefferson, Tex., and of Bayou Dorcheat, La., was 
added to the project by the river and harbor act of August 11, 1888 ; 
and a provision in the river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, 
required the widening and deepening of a part of Red River known 
as Little River from Scopini Cut-off to Knox Point. This work 
was all practically completed when the existing project was adopted 
July 13, 1892. 

2. OUACHITA AND BLACK RIVERS, ARK. AND LA. 

The original project for this improvement was adopted by river 
and harbor act approved March 3, 1871, and contemplated removing 
snags and other obstructions and dredging the worst bars between 
Arkadelphia, Ark., and Trinity, La. (This project was based on 
plan contained in H. Ex. Doc. No. 60, part 4, 41st Cong., 3d sess.) 

By river and harbor act approved June 10, 1872, a project was 
adopted providing for a system of 10 locks and dams with an aver- 
age lift of 14 feet each to give a usable depth of 4 feet or more be- 
tween the mouth of Ouachita River and Camden, Ark., throughout 
the year, in accordance with plan contained in Report Chief of En- 
gineers, 1872, page 367. A new survey was made in 1874 (Report of 
Chief of Engineers, 1874, p. 352), and this project was abandoned 
on account of many errors which were discovered in the plans and 
because the bar which then formed at the mouth of Red River dur- 
ing low water would have prevented steamboats from reaching 
Ouachita River at the time of year when the locks and dams would 
be in use. 

The project adopted by river and harbor act approved August 14, 
1876, contemplated the removal of snags, logs, wrecks, leaning tim- 
ber, etc., on the Ouachita River between Camden, Ark., and Trinity. 
La., a distance of 294 miles. The river and harbor act approved 
July 5, 1884, added Black River, between Trinity, La., and its mouth, 
56.8 miles long, to the project, and directed work of a similar char- 
acter therein. Operations under this project were continued until 



1870 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

1902 with great benefit to navigation. The rivers were kept free 
from obstructions, and steamboats were enabled to run with safety 
at any stage of water high enough to allow them to pass the shoals. 
By river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, a project was adopted 
based on plan contained in House Document No. 448, Fifty-seventh 
Congress, first session (Report of Chief of Engineers, 1902, p. 1435), 
for the construction of nine locks and movable dams with available 
lock chamber dimensions of 365 by 49 feet and depths over miter 
sills of 6^ feet. The original estimated cost of the entire system was 
$1,998,576. This project was modified before completion of any of 
the locks and dams by eliminating Lock and Dam No. 1 and by 
changing dimensions of lock chambers, and is now the present project. 

4. OUACHITA RIVER ABOVE CAMDEN TO ARKADELPHIA, ARK. 

This work was originally included in the project for the improve- 
ment of the river between Arkadelphia, Ark., and Trinity, La., in 
accordance with plan contained in House Executive Document No. 
60, part 4, Forty-first Congress, and adopted by the river and harbor 
act approved March 3, 1871. This project provided for removing 
snags and other obstructions and for dredging, and considerable 
work was done under it, but work on this particular part of the river 
was discontinued after 1874, and not resumed until 1888. 

In 1888 the river and harbor act approved August 11, 1888, adopted 
a project based on report of examination printed in Annual Report 
of the Chief of Engineers for the year 1887, page 1495. This proj- 
ect provided for the removal of snags, logs, and overhanging trees, 
and for building brush dams to scour the channel at shoals, at an esti- 
mated cost of $9,000. This project was reported as completed in 
November, 1890. (Annual Report for 1891, p. 239.) 

The existing project was adopted by the river and harbor act 
approved June 25, 1910, which provided as follows: 

Improving Ouachita River, Ark. and La., by removing snags, leaning trees, 
and other obstructions between Camden and Arkadelphia, in the State of 
Arkansas, $10,000, or as much thereof as may be hecessary. 

The river and harbor act approved March 3, 1909, had directed 
the examination of this portion of the Ouachita, but the project out- 
lined in the previous paragraph was adopted by Congress prior 
to the submission of the report on this examination, which was not 
forwarded by the Secretary of War until March 1, 1912. The 
report on this examination is printed in House Document No. 588, 
Sixty-second Congress, second session. 

5. SALINE RIVER, ARK. 

The original project for improvement of this river was based on 
report of examination published in Report of the Chief of Engineers 
for 1879, page 1003. This project was adopted by the river and har- 
bor act of June 14, 1880, and contemplated the removal of snags, 
sunken logs, etc., from the channel of the stream and leaning tree- 
along the banks from the mouth of the river to Big Island, about 260 
miles above. From 1886 until 1910 no work was done on this river. 
In the latter year Congress provided for completing the improve- 
ment in accordance with report submitted in House Document No. 



APPENDIX. 1871 

1212, Sixtieth Congress, second session. This document recommended 
a renewal and continuation of operations under the previous project 
between the mouth of the river and Turtle Bar, which is 135 miles 
above the mouth, at an estimated first cost of $5,400 and an annual 
maintenance cost of $3,000 thereafter. 

6(c). TENSAS RIVER AND BAYOU MAQON, LA. 

The original project adopted by river and harbor act of March 3, 
1881, contemplated the improvement of Tensas River from its mouth 
to Dallas, La., about 138 miles, by the removal of snags, sunken logs, 
and leaning timber. By the river and harbor act of July 5, 1884, the 
improvement of Bayou Macon from its mouth to Floyd, La., about 
112 miles, was added to the project, and the same class of work was 
proposed therein. The project for both of these streams was based 
on reports of examinations contained in House Executive Document 
No. 38, Forty-sixth Congress, third session. The work under this 
project in Tensas River was practically completed to Westwood 
Place, 81 miles above the mouth, in 189*8, and in Bayou Macon to 
Floyd in 1899. 

6 ((f). BAYOUS D'ARBONNE AND OORNEY, LA. 

The original project for these streams was adopted by river and 
harbor act approved July 5, 1884, and provided for the removal of 
snags, logs, stumps, and leaning trees between the mouth of Bayou 
D'Arbonne and Stein Bluff on Bayou Corney, a distance of 40.5 
miles, at an estimated cost of $15,000. This project was based on a 
report of examination printed in Senate Executive Document No. 69, 
Forty -eighth Congress, first session. This project was modified by 
the river and harbor act of July 13, 1892, which provided for ex- 
tending operations up Bayou Corney to Cobb Landing, 19.3 miles 
above its mouth. The river and harbor act of August 18, 1894, pro- 
vided for work of the same character in Little D'Arbonne. The 
work in Little D'Arbonne was finished in 1895, and the project for 
Bayous D'Arbonne and Corney was practically completed in 1896. 

7(a). YAZOO RIVER, MISS. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1873, and appears to have contemplated the removal of the 
eight wrecks of those sunk during the Civil War that constituted the 
worst obstructions to navigation, at an estimated cost of $40,000. 
Under this project nine wrecks were removed by February 1, 1874. 

7(c). BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MISS. 

The original project for this improvement adopted by the river 
and harbor act approved March 3, 1879, was based on an examination, 
the report on which was printed in Senate' Executive Document No. 
42, Forty-fifth Congress, third session, and contemplated removing 
snags, sunken logs, leaning timber, etc., and building pile and brush 
wing dams to scour the channel at the shoals between Clarksdale and 
the mouth of the river, about 196 miles. Estimated cost, $66,000. 



1872 EEPOET OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

7(e). STEELE AND WASHINGTON BAYOUS AND LAKE WASHINGTON, 

MISS. 

The original project for this improvement was adopted by river 
and harbor act approved July 5, 1884, and contemplated removing 
snags, sunken logs, and leaning trees in Steele Bayou, Miss., from 
Swan Lake to the mouth of the bayou, a distance of about 85 miles. 
This project was based on a report of examination which was printed 
in Annual Eeport, Chief of Engineers, 1884, page 1360. By the river 
and harbor act of August 5, 1886, Washington Bayou, about 7 miles 
long, which connects Steele Bayou and Lake Washington, was added 
to the project. Work under this project was discontinued in 1896, 
recommendations to this effect having been made for several years 
preceding, and was not resumed until after the adoption of the exist- 
ing project by the river and harbor act of June 25, 1910. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE LITTLE ROCK, 
ARK., DISTRICT. 



1. ARKANSAS RIVER, ARK. AND OKLA. 

The first project for the improvement of the Arkansas River was 
adopted by river and harbor act of July 3, 1832, in the following 
item: 

For improving the navigation of the Arkansas River, $15,000: Provided, The 
engineer department, after due examination, is satisfied that during a portion 
of the ensuing year the men and machine now employed in removing obstruc- 
tions in the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers can be more usefully employed in 
removing those of the Arkansas River. 

Many of the earlier appropriations for this work were combined 
with appropriations for similar work on other streams. The title 
of the appropriation finally became " Removing snags, wrecks, and 
other obstructions in Arkansas River, Arkansas." The work was 
that of removing snags, overhanging timber, bowlders, and reefs, 
and cutting out sand bars by temporary wing dams. The extent of 
the work was throughout the river from its mouth to Fort Smith, 
369 miles. By river and harbor act of July 5, 1884, this project was 
merged with one adopted by river and harbor act of March 3, 1879, 
reference to which is made in the second paragraph following. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1879, adopted a project for 
improvement between Fort Smith, Ark., and Wichita, Kans., based 
on report of examination printed in House Document No. 94, Forty- 
fifth Congress, third session. The work contemplated was that of 
removing snags and constructing light wing dams at some of the 
worst shoals. The estimated cost was $100,000, to be expended in 
one season. Recommendation was made that $16,350 be appropri- 
ated for a survey of the river between the limits stated, a distance of 
403 miles. 

The river and harbor act of July 5, 1884, adopted a project for 
removing obstructions in the Arkansas River from the mouth to 
Wichita, Kans., and thus merged the 1832 project and the 1879 proj- 



APPENDIX. 1873 

ect by making the one project for the same class of work extend over 
the limits of river that had heretofore been covered by those two 
projects, a total distance of 772 miles. This project continued as a 
separate one until by river and harbor act of July 13, 1902, it was 
merged with the permanent improvement project. Abstracts of 
work done under this project to June 30, 1896, inclusive, are printed 
on page 1650 of the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 
1896. 

The river and harbor act of August 14, 1876, authorized the re- 
moval of the bar at Fort Smith, Ark., at a cost of $10,000. The 
river and harbor act of June 18, 1878, appropriated an additional 
$10,000, by which the project was completed. The original condition 
was: A bar joining the right bank of the river had formed to such 
an extent that the main channel of the river was next to the left 
bank, thus preventing boats from reaching the Fort Smith shore 
during ordinary low or lower stages of the river. The work under- 
taken was that of building from the left bank a brush and stone 
dike 1,100 feet long, and thence a training wall extending down- 
stream 1,100 feet, approximately parallel to the right bank. The 
object sought was to hold the channel against the right bank along 
the Fort Smith wharf. 

The river and harbor act of July 5, 1881, appropriated $5,000 for 
the protection of the harbor at Fort Smith, Ark., in accordance with 
a report printed on pages 1397-1398 of the Annual Report of the 
Chief of Engineers for 1884. Here the right bank of the river just 
below the steamboat wharf was subjected to slight erosion during 
high water to arrest which small spur dikes had been built by the 
Fort Smith Oil & Compress Co. The work accomplished under 
this project was that of building an additional spur dike 181 feet 
long to the height of the 12-foot stage, enlarging the larger of the 
two original dikes by raising its height to the 8^foot stage and in- 
creasing its length by 40 feet. 

The river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, adopted a project for 
improvement at Pine Bluff which had three objects in view: First, 
to protect the bank immediately in front of the town of Pine Bluff 
from further erosion ; second, to rectify the course of the river in the 
bend above the town in order to remove a bar which was an im- 
pediment to navigation, and also, by diminishing the curvature of 
the bend, to lessen the tendency to excessive scour in front of the 
town; third, to prevent the formation of a cut-off threatened across 
the neck of the peninsula opposite Pine Bluff, which, if allowed to 
take place, would have left the town nearly 4 miles from the river, 
with injurious effects on the river above and below; the work to be 
accomplished by means of revetments to stop the erosion of the 
banks, and by means of dikes to rectify the course of the river in 
the bend above town. The estimate was : 

For revetting 36,000 feet of bank, at $2.50 per foot , $90, 000 

For constructing 2,000 feet of floating brush dike, at $1 per foot 2, 000 

For superintendence and contingencies 8, 000 

Total 100.000 

This work continued as a separate local project until it was ab- 
sorbed in that for the permanent improvement of the river by the 
river and harbor act of August 5, 1886. 
8373°— eng 1915 118 



1874 EEPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

The first project looking toward the general improvement of the 
river by permanent works was adopted by the river and harbor act 
of August 5, 1886, in accordance with the plan and recommenda- 
tions in Appendix V-13, Executive Document Xo. 1, Forty-ninth 
Congress. The plan set forth in Appendix V-13 (Annual Report 
for 1885, p. 1902) contemplated securing a channel at least 200 feet 
wide and 6 feet deep at low water, between the mouth of the river 
and Little Rock, 171 miles, by contracting the water width by pri- 
mary and secondary hurdles similar to those used on the Mississippi 
River in the vicinity of St. Louis, Mo. The estimated cost of the 
work was $2,538,544. This project was modified and extended by 
the river and harbor act of August 11, 1888, which adopted a project 
for the improvement of the entire river and consolidated with it all 
the local works theretofore done or then in progress (excepting the 
work of removing snags, etc., which was continued as a separate 
project), in accordance with the reports printed in the Annual Report 
of the Chief of Engineers for 1885, and in House Executive Docu- 
ment No. 90, Forty -ninth Congress, first session; such methods to 
be applied as the Secretary of War may direct, at points between 
Wichita, Kans., and the navigable mouth of the Arkansas River, 
as he may deem for the best interests of commerce. 

Although that act designated Wichita, Kans., as the upper limit 
of the work, no estimate had been submitted for improvement above 
Arkansas City, Kans., 71 miles below Wichita. The estimates sub- 
mitted for the permanent improvement of the river from the mouth 
to Arkansas City were three in number, thus : 

Mouth to Little Rock (Annual Report, 1885, p. 1603) £2. 538, 544 

Little Rock to Fort Gibson (Annual Report 1S8S, p. 13S6) 1. 307, 935 

Fort Gibson to Arkansas City (H. Doc. No. 90, 49th Cong., 1st sess.)_ 1, 696, 900 

Total 5, 543, 379 

The plans on which these estimates were based were for removal 
of rock and gravel reefs by blasting and dredging, contracting the 
waterway by permeable dikes, as used on the Mississippi River, or 
by brush and stone wing dams and protection of caving banks, no 
mention of revetments being made, except by implication in the ref- 
erences to the works on the Mississippi. An abstract of the works 
built prior to 1899 for the permanent improvement of the river, 
together with a statement of their costs, is given on pages 2151-2154 
of the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1901. A more 
detailed description of most of said works is given on paszes 1652- 
1657 of the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1896. 

The "permanent improvement" project of August 11. 1^ S S and 
the " removing obstructions " project of July 5, 1884, were merged by 
act of June 13, 1902, into the present project. 

2. WHITE RIVER, ARK. 

Although examinations of this stream, in connection with exami- 
nations of St. Francis and Black Rivers, were authorized by the 
river and harbor acts of March 3, 1833, July 4. 1836, and March 3, 
1837, the first work for its improvement appears to have been under- 
taken in 1870, in connection with snagging operations on the Mis- 
sissippi River, when the snag boat R. E. DeRussy worked a portion 



APPENDIX. 1875 

of the summer below Devall Bluff. (Annual Report, 1871, p. 376.) 
The river and harbor act of July 11, 1870, authorized an examination 
under which the river was investigated from Forsyth, Mo., to the 
mouth. (Annual Report, 1871, p. 361.) The river and harbor act 
of March 3, 1871, made appropriation for improvement in connec- 
tion with the improvement of Black and Little Red Rivers. This 
being the first direct appropriation for improvement, the date of 
that act is considered to be the date of the original project. The 
funds appropriated were expended in snagging operations, those 
on the White being limited to the river below Jacksonport. The river 
and harbor act of March 3, 1873, combined the snagging operations 
on White River below Jacksonport with those on the St. Francis 
River. This combination remained in effect until the river and 
harbor act of July 5, 1884, which carried separate appropriations for 
the streams named. 

The river and harbor act of June 23, 1874, appropriated " For 
continuing the improvement of the White River above Jacksonport."" 
This appropriation was expended in removing snags, leaning trees, 
and loose bowlders between Jacksonport and Buffalo Shoals. The river 
and harbor act of August 14, 1876, made appropriation for the improve- 
ment of the river at Buffalo Shoals. As was the case in all prior 
appropriation acts for this stream, there was no reference to plan, 
report, or examination. The plan followed was that of building 
wing dams to hold and deepen the water at the shoalest places in 
connection with the removal of rock and bowlders to the end of secur- 
ing a clear channel 200 feet wide. Map of the locality is given in 
the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1878, page 662. 
Three wing dams were constructed from tha funds derived from the 
1876 appropriation. The river and harbor act of March 3, 1879, 
made appropriation " For improving White River," no limits being 
stated. This was expended between Jacksonport and Buffalo Shoals 
(Annual Report, 1888, p. 153) in the construction of three wing dams, 
in the removal of rock from Buffalo Shoals, and in similar work on 
shoals below, with the object of providing a good navigable channel 
in the upper White River available throughout the entire season. 
(Annual Report, 1880, pp. 153-154.) The river and harbor act of June 
14, 1880, made further appropriation for improving the river above 
Buffalo Shoals. Examinations of and reports on this part of the 
river had been made in 1871 and 1872. Work under this 1880 appro- 
priation, however, was not begun until a new examination could be 
made. Thereafter the plan followed was that of extending up- 
stream on three shoals the work which had been done at Buffalo 
Shoals. 

The river and harbor act of July 5, 1884, consolidated the snagging 
operations below Jacksonport with the work of permanent improve- 
ment between Jacksonport and Buffalo Shoals and that above 
Buffalo Shoals, and provided for a survey of the river from Forsyth 
to the mouth in order that a definite plan and estimate of the cost 
for the improvement of the river might be formulated. Such a 
plan, referred to in annual reports as " the project of 1888," was to 
deepen the water on the shoals by contraction works and to remove 
rock, bowlders, and snags from the channel, the object being to ob- 
tain a 5-foot depth at low water from the mouth of the river to New- 
port and 2-foot depth from there to Buffalo Shoals, at an estimated 



1876 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

cost of $105,815 for permanent works, and an additional expenditure 
of $8,000 a year for two or three years for snagging operations after 
the permanent works had been completed. (Annual Report, 1888, p. 
1406.) For the reasons stated in the Annual Report of the Chief 
of Engineers for 1891, page 2049, the estimate was inadequate to 
accomplish the object sought. The river and harbor act of July 13, 
1892, appropriated $53,815 to complete the project, and an additional 
sum of $21,185 to be expended in the discretion of the Secretary of 
War. The " additional sum " and funds provided in subsequent ap- 
propriations were expended along the lines of the project of 1888, 
with the addition of dredging between Batesville and Jacksonport in 
1897. No permanent works for open-channel improvement have been 
built since the fiscal year 1896. An abstract of the work done prior 
to and including that of 1896 is printed on pages 1668-1874 of the 
Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1896, and a statement 
of the results accomplished above Batesville is given on pages 1680- 
1682 of the said report. The river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, 
adopted a lock-and-dam project for the improvement of the river 
above Batesville. The appropriation made by that act for open- 
channel improvement was "for completion." However, the river 
and harbor act of June 13, 1902, provided for continuing the im- 
provement of White River without reference to plan or estimate. 
From this it has been held that the existing project for the mainte- 
nance of channel below Batesville dates from the river and harbor act 
of March 3, 1899. 

The lock-and-dam project adopted by the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1899, was based upon a report printed in the Annual Re- 
port of the Chief of Engineers for 1897, page 1902, and was to pro- 
vide slackwater navigation from Batesville to Buffalo Shoals, 89 
miles, by 10 fixed dams with concrete locks, at a total estimated cost of 
$1,600,000. The locks were to be 175 feet between quoins, 36 feet 
wide in the chamber, with 4-foot depth on the miter sills. Three of 
the locks and dams have been constructed, at a cost of $813,774.51, 
and are being operated and cared for under the indefinite appropria- 
tion " Operating and care of canals and other works of navigation." 
A board of engineers, appointed pursuant to the requirements of the 
river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, reported that the construction 
of further locks and dams was not desirable (H. Doc. No. 150, 59th 
Cong., 1st sess.), and the project has been abandoned, the appropria- 
tion item in the river and harbor act of March 3, 1907, being " Com- 
pleting improvement by the construction of Lock and Dam No. 

g * * * 55 

3. WHITE RIVER AT DEVALL BLUFF, ARK. 

This is a local work to prevent a cut-off in White River near 
Devall Bluff, Ark. The first appropriation was made by the river 
and harbor act of June 13, 1902, which provided that $7,500 of the 
amount appropriated for White River might, if required in the in- 
terest of navigation, be used to prevent cut-off between Choctaw Rail- 
way bridge and Devall Bluff. Nothing was undertaken under the 
special authority referred to. and the fund was utilized for the gen- 
eral purposes of the river. The question of cut-off near Devall Bluff 
was revived by the river and harbor act of March 4, 1913, which 
adopted the present project. 



APPENDIX. 1877 

4. OPERATING AND CARE. OF LOCKS AND DAMS NOS. 1, 2, AND 3, 
UPPER WHITE RIVER, ARK. 

The project for the construction of these locks and dams was 
adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1899. The plan 
(H. Doc. No. 78, 54th Cong., 2d sess.) proposed slackwater for 4-foot 
navigation from Batesville, Ark., to Buffalo Shoals, Ark., 89 miles, 
by the construction of 10 locks and dams, at an estimated cost of 
$1,600,000. The locks were to be of concrete masonry with wooden 
gates ; the dams were to be of timber cribs, stone filled. The average 
lift of each of the locks was fixed at 14.5 feet. The river and harbor 
act of March 2, 1907, abandoned the original project, appropriating 
for the completion of the improvement by the construction of Lock 
and Dam No. 3. This action was based on a report by a board of 
engineers published in House Document No. 150, Fifty-ninth Con- 
gress, first session. Since the completion of Lock and Dam No. 3 
the project has been for maintenance of the several works under the 
appropriation " Operating and care of canals and other works of 
navigation, indefinite." 

5. CACHE RIVER, ARK. 

The original project, based on a report printed on page 1547, An- 
nual Eeport of the Chief of Engineers for 1887, and adopted by the 
river and harbor act of August 11, 1888, provided for the building of 
a small hand-propelled snag boat and working it from Riverside to 
the mouth of the river (102 miles) , at an estimated cost of $7,000. The 
estimate was inadequate, and $2,000 additional was appropriated by 
the river and harbor act of July 13, 1892. An additional $2,000 was 
derived from the sale of the boat. The expenditure of these addi- 
tional funds completed the project. The operations indicated se- 
cured a fair channel for navigation at medium stages. 

The river and harbor act of August 14, 1894, authorized allotment 
from the White River appropriation to this river for the purpose of 
removing obstructions, without reference to limits of work or esti- 
mate of cost. Subsequent river and harbor acts having made appro- 
priations, either by allotment or direct, for the same purpose, that 
date (Aug. 14, 1894) is held to be the date of the present project. 

6. BLACK AND CURRENT RIVERS, ARK. AND MO. 
(a) BLACK RIVER. 

The improvement of Black River appears to have been first au- 
thorized by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1871, which appro- 
priated funds for the joint improvement of White, Black, and Little 
Red Rivers, without a stated distribution. The work proposed ap- 
pears to have been snagging operations. But a very small amount 
of the joint fund was spent on Black River. The report on the work 
accomplished under the appropriation states that the snag boat could 
get but a short distance above the mouth of Black River owing to 
the lack of water and to acute bends. (Annual Report, 1872, p. 343.) 
The river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, made the first separate ap- 
propriation for this river and adopted the present project. 



1878 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 
(5) CURRENT RIVER.* 

The original project adopted by the river and harbor act of June 
10, 1872, contemplated the removal of snags and leaning timber and 
the construction of wing dams at certain of the shoals. A report of 
an examination made in 1871 (Annual Report, 1872, p. 395) gives an 
estimate of $25,722.62 as the amount required for the improvement 
of the river from Van Buren to the mouth. The act referred to 
appropriated $5,000. This, with a sum of $20,000 appropriated by the 
State of Missouri, covered the estimate referred to (Annual Report, 
1873, p. 460). The river and harbor act of March 3, 1881, adopted 
a project for the improvement of the river from Doniphan to the 
mouth. This, like the former project, contemplated improvement by 
means of wing dams to concentrate the water over the shoals and by 
the removal of snags, logs, and overhanging timber. The estimated 
cost of the improvement was $17,365. The appropriation was $2,000. 
With the expenditure of the appropriation named, nothing further 
was undertaken until the adoption of the present project. 

7. ST. FRANCIS AND L'ANGUILLE RIVERS AND BLACKFISH BAYOU, 

ARK. 

(a) ST. FRANCIS RIVER. 

The original project for the improvement of St. Francis River, 
adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3. 1871, apparently 
was based upon the report of an examination printed on page 356 
of the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1871, as that 
report recommended the removal of snags and fallen trees between 
the mouth of the river and Wittsburg, and the work undertaken was 
along those lines. The river and harbor act of March 3, 1873. com- 
bined snagging operations on the St. Francis River with similar 
work on the White River; operations on AVhite River being limited to 
below Jacksonport, and those on St. Francis River to below Witts- 
burg (Annual Report, 1873, p. 492). This combination of work con- 
tinued until the two rivers were separated by the river and harbor 
act of July 5, 1884. 

The river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, adopted a project for 
the improvement of the St. Francis River from Wittsburg to Lestera 
Landing by the removal of such obstructions as interfered with the 
safe navigation of the river and " the lake." Through " the lake " it 
was proposed to cut out and properly mark a channel so as to desig- 
nate to steamboats the proper route. (Annual Report, 1880, part 2, 
p. 159.) The first separately adopted project for the improvement 
of the entire river was that adopted by the river and harbor act of 
July 5, 1884. This contemplated the improvement of the river from 
its mouth to St. Francis, Ark., by snagging operations and by clos- 
ing chutes and sloughs in the St. Francis sunken lands, so as to make 
the river navigable at high stages through the latter, at medium 
stages to Marked Tree, and at low stages to a point 30 miles below 
Madison, Ark., at an estimated cost of $8,000 annually for main- 
tenance. The act of August 11. 1888, adopted a project for the 
improvement of the St. Francis River in Missouri, this being the sec- 
tion above the sunken lands. Upon the adoption of that project Ken- 



APPENDIX. 1879 

nett, Mo., 25 miles below St. Francis, was taken as the head of im- 
provement for St. Francis River, Ark., in order to avoid confusion 
or overlap as to the limitation of the project for the improvement of 
the St. Francis River, Mo. This project continued until by the river 
and harbor act of June 13, 1902, its scope was enlarged to that of the 
present project, which includes the L'Anguille River up to Marianna. 
An abstract of the work done prior to the fiscal year 1896 is given on 
page 1692 of the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1896. 

(b) L'ANGUrLLE RIVER. 

The original project, which was for improvement by snagging 
operations, at an estimated cost of $15,000, was adopted by the river 
and harbor act of June 18, 1878. Appropriations ceased with that 
made by the river and harbor act of June 4, 1880. The river and 
harbor act of June 13, 1902, enlarged the St. Francis River project 
to include this stream. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE ST. LOUIS, MO., 
DISTRICT. 



1. IMPROVEMENT OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN OHIO AND 
MISSOURI RIVERS. 

Project of 1872, superseded 1881; project of 1881, revised 1883; 
modified '1895, 1896, 1902, 1905, 1906, 1907, and restored, together 
with dredging, 1910. 

In its original condition, prior to any improvement, the navigable 
channel of the Mississippi River at low water had a natural depth in 
many places of only 3^ to 4 feet. The main channels were divided by 
islands and bars, which formed chutes, sloughs, and secondary chan- 
nels, through which considerable parts of the low- water flow were di- 
verted, to the detriment of navigation. 

The first appropriation for work of improvement was included in 
the river and harbor act, July 4, 1836, " for a pier to give direction to 
the current o*f the Mississippi River, near the city of St. Louis," and 
subsequently, 1837 and 1844, other appropriations were made for 
work in the harbor of that city. In 1852 an appropriation was made 
for work on the Mississippi River between St. Paul and the Ohio 
River. The expenditures within this district under these old appro- 
priations are now not known. 

The original project for the general improvement of the river in 
this engineer district for the benefit of navigation was recommended 
by a board of engineers in report dated April 13, 1872. Work was 
begun in that jesir and continued for a number of years as appropria- 
tions were made. The works consisted of solid dikes and dams of 
brush and stone, to confine the low-water volume of the river to a 
single channel, and of revetments to hold and preserve the banks from 
erosion where necessary and advisable to do so. 

Under this project work was done at the following localities : Saw- 
yer Bend, Venice, Cahokia Chute, Arsenal Island, Horsetail Bar, 



1880 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

Fort Chartres, Turkey Island, Kaskaskia, Liberty Island, Devils 
Island, and Cairo, and the total amount expended was $1,495,000 for 
new work. 

2. REMOVING SNAGS AND WRECKS FROM THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER 
BELOW THE MOUTH OF THE MISSOURI RIVER AND OLD AND 
ATOHAFALAYA RIVERS. 

When this work was originally begun the navigation of the river 
was seriously obstructed by numerous snags, logs, etc., which had 
lodged in the channel, and to which additions were made with each 
rise of the river. A large number of wrecks of flatboats, barges, 
steamboats, and other river craft also obstructed the navigable chan- 
nels and menaced life and property. 

For the removal of these obstructions, appropriations were made 
as early as 1824. The project adopted consisted of building boats 
suitable for removing snags, logs, drift heaps, wrecks, etc.. and 
operating them whenever the stage of the river was favorable and 
funds were available, and in cutting trees from caving banks to pre- 
vent their falling into the river and becoming obstructions to naviga- 
tion. 

Appropriations for this work were made at irregular intervals 
in lump sums, under the general style of " Western rivers, dredging, 
removal of snags, wrecks, and other obstructions, including Arkan- 
sas, Mississippi, Missouri, and Ohio Rivers." 

In the river and harbor act approved March 3, 1879, the first 
definite allotment to each river was made, and work was done under 
these uncertain appropriations until August 11. 1888, when the 
present project was placed on a definite basis by the adoption of the 
river and harbor act of that date, which provided a definite annual 
amount, $100,000, for removal of obstructions in the Mississippi 
River below the Missouri River. 

The approximate amount expended on the previous projects to 
March 3, 1879, was $358,627.35, and the work done to that date was 
12,003 snags destroyed, 53,299 trees cut, 82 drift piles destroyed, and 
1 wreck removed. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PR.O.TECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE ROCK ISLAND, 
ILL., DISTRICT. 



MISSISSIPPI RIVER. 

1. Rock Island Rapids improvement, Mississippi River. — The Rock 
Island Rapids extend from Le Claire. Iowa, to Rock Island, 111., a dis- 
tance of about 14 miles. The initial appropriation for their improve- 
ment was made by act of June 23, 18G6. A board of engineers in 1866 
advised the cutting of a channel through the chains of rock. Based 
on a survey of Capt. P. C. Hains, Corps of Engineers, made in 1866, 
the original project was approved. This project contemplated "the 
connection of the deep pools by channels cut through the chains 200 
feet wide with depth of 4 feet at low water." These plans were car- 
ried out and virtually completed in 1882. A full report of this im- 
provement is in Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1886, 



APPENDIX. 1881 

pages 1429 to 1465. As the work progressed, additional fields and 
patches of rock were found, increasing the rock excavation from 
the estimated 57,451 cubic yards to 87,926, and the cost from 
$813,601.80 to $1,166,608.50. This work extended over a period of 
16 years. 

(a) Additional project by board of engineers, January 16, 1889, 
report of the Chief of Engineers, page 1751 et seq., which included 
widening of the cuts in the bends, dam construction, piers for chan- 
nel guides, and sand dredging at an estimated cost of $328,900. This 
project was not entirely carried out and was merged in the current 
6-foot channel project adopted in 1907. The work was changed 
and much increased and $694,856 had been expended before the work 
was discontinued. All of the work proposed by the board was carried 
out at a less cost than estimated. 

2. Improving Des Moines Rapids — Des Moines Rapids Canal. — 
This improvement, like that of the Rock Island Rapids, was consid- 
ered by a board of engineers in 1866 (Annual Report of the Chief 
of Engineers for 1867), and the plan recommended and adopted pro- 
vided for the building of a closed lateral canal 8 miles long, and for 
the cutting of an open channel in the rock bed of the river over the 
remaining 4 miles of rapids which extended from Montrose to 
Keokuk. The prism of the canal to be 200 feet in width in its 
narrowest parts and 5 feet in depth, with 3 locks, 350 feet by 80 feet 
in the chamber, with lifts varying with the river stage surmounting 
a fall of 19 feet at low water. The open canal to be 200 feet wide 
and 5 feet deep at low water. This work, with its modifications, was 
not entirely completed until 1894, although the canal was opened in 
1877. The initial appropriation, $200,000, was made by river and 
harbor act of June 23, 1866. The original estimate was $2,530,000; 
its actual cost, $4,574,950. The cost was increased by delayed appro- 
priations and heavy losses due to high water. The quantities were 
greatly in excess of the original estimate. This improvement was 
made obsolete by the construction of the power dam at Keokuk, 
which provides a single lock 400 feet by 110 feet, with an extreme 
lift of 40 feet and a controlling depth on the lower miter sill of 7 
feet. This lock was opened to navigation in June, 1913. 

3. Flint Creek to Iowa River Levee. — The river and harbor act of 
August 18, 1894, provided for a survey on the west side of the Missis- 
sippi River from Flint Creek to Iowa River, " with a view to improv- 
ing the navigation by preventing the water from overflowing the 
rattM-al and artificial banks along those parts of the river and deep- 
ening the channel." The report (H. Ex. Doc. No. 161, 53d Cong., 
3d sess.) proposed a levee 42 miles long, including cross levees on 
both sides of De Soto Creek. These cross levees were afterwards 
omitted, reducing the length to about 35 miles. Estimates were made 
for an earthern bank with a slope of 3 on 1 on the river side and 

2 on 1 on the back side, with 4 feet width of crown. Grade, 

3 feet above high water of 1888. Estimate for 1,855,193 cubic yards 
earthwork, $305,000. Congress adopted this project in the sundry 
civil act of March 2, 1895, and the work was completed in 1900, a 
total of $300,000 having been appropriated. These funds completed 
the levee with about the same quantity of earthwork as estimated, 
besides providing for the surveys, right of way (mostly donated), 
gravity drainage, superintendence and inspection, repair and mainte- 



1882 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

nance, revetment of 15,000 linear feet of levee bank and 6,876 linear 
feet of shore protection. A full and final report on this levee is in 
Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1902, pages 1637 to 
1646. Since the levee was completed, about $36,000 has been expended 
for earthen reinforcement of bank and for shore protection. 

4. Mississippi River improvement at Moline, III. — The river and 
harbor act of June 13, 1902, provided for examination and survey of 
Mississippi River at Moline, 111., with a view to the construction of a 
lock. The report (H. Doc. No. 397, 58th Cong., 2d sess.) presents a 
plan and estimate for 4 feet depth in channel as follows: Lock (350 
feet by 80 feet by 6 feet controlling depth), $185,000; dam, $19,216; 
rock excavation $141,572; contingencies $42,217; total $386,005. 
Congress adopted the project in the sundry civil act of March 3, 
1905, and in that and the two following years appropriated the full 
amount. The work was completed in 1909 and although some 
changes were made in location of lock and dam, involving an increase 
in rock excavation, earthwork and masonry, the estimate was not 
exceeded. 

5. Improving Mississippi River, Missouri River to Minneapolis. — 
The river and harbor act of June 18, 1878, appropriated funds for 
improvement of Mississippi River, widening and deepening the chan- 
nel from St. Paul to Des Moines Rapids; also for same purposes 
from Des Moines Rapids to mouth of the Ohio. No surveys or 
projects had been rendered prior to above date, but a continuous sur- 
vey from St. Paul to the Illinois River was made in 1878-79. No 
project and estimate for this entire work was ever rendered, it being 
thought best to present projects from year to year, selecting points 
known to be most troublesome. (Annual Report for 1879, p. 1498.) 
This method ceased in 1907, when the 6-foot project and estimate of 
$20,000,000 were adopted. The original project and subprojects were 
intended to provide a channel 4^ feet deep at low water of 1864. The 
appropriations 1878 to 1907 aggregated $12,157,500.02. 

6. Harbor at Rock Island, III. — The river and harbor act of March 
3, 1879, provided for a survey of Rock Island Harbor. The report 
(H. Doc. No. 32, 46th Cong., 2d sess.) presented a plan for dredging 
along the harbor front and on the middle ground bars at an esti- 
mated cost of $26,759.15. The river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, 
adopted the project and appropriated $6,000, which was followed 
by an additional appropriation of $6,000 in the river and harbor act 
of March 3, 1881. 

(a) Additional project. — The river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, 
allotted $5,000 for maintenance. A project was prepared in that 
year for rock excavation to a grade of 4 feet at low water from 
Seventeenth to Twentieth Streets at an estimated cost of $25,000. 
Only $10,000 was appropriated and work ceased in 1898. 

7. Harbor at Muscatine, Iowa. — A survey was made by order of the 
Chief of Engineers subsequent to the initial appropriation made in 
the river and harbor act of March 3, 1879. The project contem- 
plated dredging along the steamboat landings at a cost of $19,250. 
Funds appropriated ($20,000) were expended in 1883, the work- orig- 
inally contemplated having been performed and some additional 
dredging. 

{a) Supplementary. — Sundry civil act of June 4, 1897, appro- 
priated $15,000 for dredging to a 6-foot depth at low water along 



APPENDIX. 1883 

the river front from the bridge to below Pine Street. Work com- 
pleted in 189S under appropriations aggregating $25,000. Sand 
and gravel removed, 89,590 cubic yards. 

(b) Supplementary. — The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, 
appropriated $10,000 for improvement of harbor at Muscatine, Iowa. 
No prior reference to this office or survey. Project in 1901 for shore 
protection and dredging; completed in 1910. 

Note.— Appropriations were made for Muscatine Harbor 1S79-1902, without 
prior examinations or surveys, to the amount of $45,000. Estimates were 
made chiefly for dredging to fit the appropriations in terms " so much as funds 
will permit." 

8. Mississippi River at Andalusia, III. — Elver and harbor act of 
June 14, 1880, ordered survey. The report (H. Ex. Doc. No. 37, 
16th Cong., 3d sess.) presented a project and estimate for construc- 
tion of 3 dams and 900 linear feet of shore protection at a cost of 
$18,000. Congress, in the river and harbor act of March 3, 1881, 
approved the project and appropriated $6,000. This amount was 
amended and subsequently allotments were made from appropria- 
tions for general improvement, of which this work is a part. 

9. Ice harbor at Dubuque, Iowa. — Project December 31, 1880 (H. 
Ex. Doc. No. 49, 47th Cong., 1st sess.), approved by river and harbor 
acts of August 2, 1882, and July 5, 1884, appropriating $40,000, the 
full amount of the estimate, $35,000 of which was for dredging and for 
riprap $4,500. The latter amount was covered into the Treasury, 
not being needed for the intended purpose. 

10. Dry dock at Des Moines Rapids Canal. — Survey ordered by 
Congress, the report of which (H. Ex. Doc. No. 179, 47th Cong., 
1st sess.) recommended a dock 168 feet by 400 feet by 6 feet ruling 
depth, at a cost of $125,000. Project rendered February 10, 1883; 
adopted by Congress July 5, 1884. Appropriated, 1884 to 1889, the 
full amount of the estimate. Completed in 1890 in accordance with 
original project. 

11. Improving Mississippi River at Louisiana, Mo. — The report 
(H. Ex. Doc. No. 37, 46th Cong., 3d sess.) recommended construc- 
tion of several dams and shore protections, both above and below the 
bridge, at a cost of $45,000. Project approved by river and harbor 
act of March 3, 1881, which appropriated $10,000. Subsequent allot- 
ments made from general improvement, into which this project was 
merged. 

12. Mississippi River at Hannibal, Mo. — The original project for 
this work, submitted in January, 1880, contemplated, at a cost of 
$60,000, the removal by dredging of large gravel and mud bars in 
front of Hannibal and the construction of two spur and one closing 
dams from the Illinois side to confine the channel to the Missouri 
shore and prevent the bars from re-forming. This project was made 
under orders of the Chief of Engineers and was approved by the 
river and harbor acts of June 14, 1880, and March 3, 1881, appropri- 
ating jointly $45,000. This work was then merged in general 
improvement and the entire project was carried out. 

13. Clarksville Harbor, Mo. — Survey and estimate ordered by river 
and harbor act of August 11, 1888. Report and project January 11, 
1889. Project included construction of one wing and one closing 
dam, at a cost of $25,000. Approved by river and harbor act of 
September 19, 1890, allotting $15,000 from general improvement, in 
which the project was afterwards merged. 



1884 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

14. La Crosse Harbor, Wis. — Report ordered by Congress (H. Doc. 
No. 210, 54th Cong., 2d sess.) recommended a bulkhead 1,575 feet 
long, another 450 feet long, and dredging; estimated cost, $17,000. 
Congress approved and appropriated full amount in the river and 
harbor act of June 3, 1896, and the sundry civil act of March 3, 1899. 

15. Harbors in Lake Pepin — Kings Coulee Pier. — Report on sur- 
vey ordered by Congress (H. Doc. No. 52, 52d Cong.. 2d sess.) makes 
project for a pier 770 feet long, with gravel foundation, crest 12 feet 
above low water, estimated to cost $30,000. Approved by Congress 
in the river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, allotting full amount. 
Completed in 1898 under modified project. 

16. Harbors in Lake Pepin — North Pepin Pier. — Report on sur- 
vey ordered by Congress (H. Ex. Doc. No. 112, 56th Cong., 1st sess.) 
recommends a pier 1,000 feet long; core of gravel heavily riprapped; 
crown 10 feet wide, 12 feet above low water; slope, 1\ on 1. Con- 
gress adopted project in river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, and 
appropriated $14,000, the full amount of the estimate. Project 
modified for heavier bank and slope 2 on 1. Congress approved and 
appropriated $11,500 in sundry civil act of March 3, 1905. Total 
cost of pier, $25,500. Completed, 1908. 

17. Harbors in Lake Pepin — Pier at Stockholm, Wis. — Report of 
survey ordered by Congress (S. Ex. Doc. No. 124, 47th Cong., 1st 
sess.) recommends crib piers, one 1,000 feet long to cost $73,370, and 
one 500 feet long to cost $34,592. Congress approved project and 
appropriated $25,000 in river and harbor acts of August 2, 1882. and 
July 5, 1884. A new project was made, adapted to the funds, result- 
ing in a pier completed in 1884, 579 feet long and 12 feet above low 
water. 

18. Harbors in Lake Pepin — Pier at Lake City, Minn. — Report of 
survey ordered by Congress (S. Ex. Doc. 124, 47th Cong., 1st sess.) 
recommended two projects, one for a crib pier 1,000 feet long to cost 
$154,583, and one for a crib pier 500 feet long to cost $53,493. Con- 
gress in river and harbor acts of 1882, 1884, and 1886 appropriated 
$35,000. Project modified in 1887 to a sand foundation. Pier com- 
pleted in 1887, 870 feet long. 

19. Davenport ice harbor. — No prior survey. River and harbor 
act of 1902 appropriated $5,000 and made available $10,000 in the 
sundry civil act of March 3, 1899, both being allotments from general 
improvement funds. Project raising dam at head of Rockingham 
Slough, dredging 54,000 yards, piling and cribs for mooring pur- 
poses; work fully completed in 1904 with a balance of $1,953. 

20. Quincy Bay, Mississippi River at Quincy, and LL arbor at 
Quincy, 111. — Report on survey ordered by Congress (S. Ex. Doc. No. 
53, 45th Cong., 3d sess.) recommended one closing dam and three 
spur dams for river improvement ($26,000) ; dredging in Bay, 
$170,000; riprap, $7,500; total, $223,500. Initial appropriation by 
Congress in river and harbor act of March 3, 1879. The river im- 
provement was carried out, and up to July 1, 1914, there had been 
expended for dredging $129,481, about one-third of which was for 
redredging or maintenance. The project has been changed many 
times, and all of the original project for the bay is now abandoned 
except for keeping the lower bay in good condition by timely dredg- 
ing under the head of maintenance. 



APPENDIX. 1885 

21. Rush Chute and Harbor at Burlington, Iowa. — Special survey 
under head of " transportation routes to the seaboard " made in 1875. 
Project called for dams at Rush Chute and dredging. Estimated 
cost, $35,222. Approved by Congress in the river and harbor act 
of August 14, 1876, appropriating $10,000. In 1879 project en- 
larged, adding $20,000 for dams and dredging. In 1881 merged in 
general improvement. Total of special appropriations $30,000. 
Work began in 1877. 

22. Mississippi River, vicinity of Fort Madison, Iowa. — Special 
survey under head of " Transportation routes to the seaboard " made 
in 1875. Project called for closing Niota Chute; estimate, $30,187. 
Approved by Congress in the river and harbor act of August 14, 
1876, appropriating $10,000. Total special appropriations, $24,100. 
Merged in general improvement and completed in 1880. Work began 
in 1877. 

23. Removing bars in Mississippi River opposite Dubuque, Iowa. — 
Board of engineers in 1876 made report, project, and estimate. Pro- 
ject for dredging, $15,000 appropriated by river and harbor act of 
August 14, 1876. Merged in general improvement with dams and 
dredging added. Completed in 1881. Total allotments, $41,000. 

24. Mississippi River, North La Crosse to mouth of Root River. — 
No survey was made prior to appropriation of $12,500 in the river 
and harbor act of June 18, 1878. The project comprised two dams to 
close the chutes opposite La Crosse. Work was done by contract in 
1878, and operations in this vicinity were then merged in general 
improvement. 

25. Cuivre River, Mo. — The river and harbor act of March 3, 1879, 
ordered a survey (S. Ex. Doc. No. 36, 46th Cong., 2d sess.). Report, 
project, and estimate rendered December 29, 1879. The project in- 
volved dredging in Cuivre Slough and on four bars in the river, one 
closing dam, and removal of snags, wrecks, etc., at a cost of $30,000. 
Congress approved this project in the river and harbor act of June 
14, 1880, appropriating $2,000 ; total appropriations to August 2, 1882, 
$12,000. Congress afterward declared the river unnavigable, and the 
improvement was abandoned. 

26. Mississippi River, opposite Guttenberg, Iowa. — Allotment of 
$3,000 in the river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, and $5,000 in the 
river and harbor act of March 3, 1881. No prior survey. Project 
included a dam across Swift Slough and shore protection on the 
island. Estimate, $8,000 ; work completed in 1882. Merged in gen- 
eral improvement of Mississippi River. 

27. Mississippi River at and above Alexandria, Mo. — Special sur- 
vey made in 1878 under orders of the Chief of Engineers. Report, 
project, and estimate January 7, 1879. Proposed work, three spur 
dams from left bank and one from right bank. Estimate, $30,945. 
Approved by Congress in the river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, 
and $10,000 appropriated. Additional appropriation in the river 
and harbor act of March 3, 1881, $6,000. Project only partially car- 
ried out under special appropriations, but was merged in general 
improvement and afterwards completed. 

28. Mississippi River at Hamburg Bay, III. — Examination ordered 
by river and harbor act of August 5, 1886, and $10,000 appropriated 
for work. The report recommended, with an estimate, the expendi- 
ture of funds available in dredging a 6-foot channel 240 feet wide 



1886 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

through several bars. The work was done in 1886 and 1887. The river 
and harbor act of June 13, 1902, declares that " Hamburg Bay is 
hereby included in and made a part of the general improvement of 
the Mississippi River," but between 1887 and 1902 all dredging work 
was obliterated. A survey was ordered bv sundry civil act of March 
3, 1905. (H. Ex. Doc. No. 577, 59th Cong., lst'sess.) This report, 
project^ and estimate, under date of November 29, 1905, describes 
a plan for dredging, at a cost of $138,800, but all authorities con- 
curred in the opinion that the work was not worthy at the present 
time, and all improvements of the bay to provide a suitable winter 
harbor were abandoned. 

29. Mississippi River at Clinton, Iowa. — In the sundry civil act of 
March 3, 1899, $25,000 was allotted without prior survey. Adopted 
project comprised construction of four wing dams and as much 
dredging as funds would permit. Work was commenced in 1899 and 
completed in 1908, about as estimated. Now merged in general 
improvement. 

30. Warsaw to Quincy Levee. — Report in House Executive Docu- 
ment No. Ill, Fifty-third Congress, third session. Project rendered 
in 1895 covered the reinforcing and rebuilding of the entire levee at 
a cost of $85,500. The sundry civil act of. March 2, 1895, appropri- 
ated the full amount of the estimate. Work began in 1895 and was 
practically completed in 1896. The river and harbor act of June 3, 
1896, and the sundry civil act of March 3, 1899, appropriated $5,000 
each for repairs. 

31. Mississippi River in the vicinity of Prairie du Chien. — No sur- 
vey had been made prior to allotment of $30,000 from the river and 
harbor act of September 19, 1890. The project rendered in 1891 
covered a series of wing dams, of which 15 were built under contract 
in 1891 and 1892, in accordance with plans and estimate, which 
latter included as much construction work as funds would permit. 
Now merged in general improvement. 

32. Mississippi River at West St. Paul. — No survey had been made 
prior to an allotment of $15,000 in the river and harbor act of August 
2, 1882. Project covered as much dredging as funds would permit. 
Work was performed by contract in 1885 as projected and estimated. 

33. Galena River, 111. — The river and harbor act of March 3, 1873, 
provided for a survey of "Galena River from its mouth to Galena, 
111." The report in 1873 recommended dredging to 6 feet above low 
water above the cut-off and 1 feet below, and also a small amount 
of dredging in Harris Slough. Estimate, $357,000. No considera- 
tion was given this project, but appropriations were made for the 
work, based in part on the project of 1873, aggregating $66,000, 
1878 to 1881. About one-third of the dredging was performed, but 
its effects were very soon eradicated. The river and harbor act of 
September 19, 1890, authorized the city of Galena to bnild a lock 
and dam and agreeing to pay $100,000 when 3 feet depth had been 
secured during an entire season. This improvement was accepted 
and paid for in 1891, and since that time has been operated and main- 
tained under the river and harbor acts of July 5, 1884. and March 3. 
1909, and such operation and care is the current project. 

Note. — A large number of small projects carried out by means of allotments 
from various river and harbor acts, and for which no prior survey or estimate 
was made, have been omitted. 



APPENDIX. 1887 

HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROTECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE ST. PAUL, MINN., 
DISTRICT. 



L MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN ST. PAUL AND MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. 

This project contemplates the improvement of the Mississippi 
River between the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway 
bridge in St. Paul and the Washington Avenue Bridge in Minneapo- 
lis by means of locks and dams. The matter was first brought to 
the attention of Congress in 1866, when the Legislature of the State 
of Minnesota memorialized Congress to make a grant of public lands 
to aid in the construction by private parties of a lock and dam at 
Meeker Island, about 2 miles below the Washington Avenue Bridge. 
By act of July 23, 1868, a grant of 200,000 acres was made for the 
purpose, subject to the work being clone within two years. The con- 
ditions not being fulfilled, Congress, by act of March 3, 1873, appro- 
priated $25,000 for a lock and dam at Meeker Island, to be available 
when formal relinquishment of the land grant had been made. A 
satisfactory relinquishment not having been made, the appropriation 
was never used and was covered back into the Treasury in 1885. 

By act of August 18, 1894, Congress authorized the construction of 
Lock and Dam No. 2, as part of the project for two locks and dams, 
one (No. 1) with a lift of 13.3 feet, to be located just above Minne- 
haha Creek and 6.34 miles above the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis 
& Omaha Railway bridge, and the other (No. 2), with a lift of 13.8 
feet, to be located about 2.88 miles above No. 1. The locks were to 
be SO feet wide and 334 feet long, with a depth of 5 feet on the lower 
miter sills at low water. The estimated cost of both locks and dams 
was $1,166,457. 

The act of March 3, 1899, authorized the completion of Lock and 
Dam No. 2 and the construction of Lock and Dam No. 1 by continu- 
ing contract. An increase in the limit of cost to $1,466,000 was au- 
thorized by the act of March 3, 1905. 

The project was modified by the act of March 2, 1907, which re- 
quired a channel depth of 6 feet, instead of 5 feet. This involved an 
increase in the lift of the two dams and an increase in the depth on 
the lower miter sill of Lock No. 1 to 6 feet at low water. 

2. OPERATING AND CARE OF LOCK AND DAM NO. 2, MISSISSIPPI 
RIVER, BETWEEN ST. PAUL AND MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. 

Lock and Dam No. 2 is the first of a series of two between St. Paul 
and Minneapolis, Minn., the object of which was to provide slack- 
water navigation over the stretch of river between Minnehaha Creek 
and the Washington Avenue Bridge, Minneapolis, Minn. No. 2 is 
the upper one of the series and was constructed first because naviga- 
tion on the section above was difficult and hazardous under the most 
favorable conditions and virtually impossible at low stages of the 
river. 

The river and harbor act approved June 25, 1910, modified the 
project for improving the Mississippi River between St. Paul and 
Minneapolis by providing for an increase in the proposed height of 
Lock and Dam No. 1. When the project is completed that lock and 



1888 



REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, T7. S. ARMY. 



dam will be sufficient for navigation purposes between the two cities, 
and Lock and Dam No. 2 will not then be needed. Lock and Dam 
No. 2 was completed in 1906, and its maintenance and operation have 
been provided for since July 1, 1907, by allotments from the appro- 
priation for " Operating and care of canals and other works of navi- 
gation." 

3. RESERVOIRS AT HEADWATERS OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER. 

These are intended to improve navigable depths on the Mississippi 
River above Lake Pepin. Before improvement the river was subject 
to fluctuations of level between wide limits and was often unhaviga- 
ble at low stages. 

The project adopted in 18S0 called for the construction of 41 reser- 
voirs in Minnesota and Wisconsin to collect surplus water from the 
precipitation of winter, spring, and early summer and release it 
systematically during low water, so as to benefit navigation on the 
Mississippi River. The estimated cost, exclusive of land and flowage 
easements, was $1,809,083. 

Under the project six reservoirs have been built, as follows: 



Reservoir. 


Capacity. 


Original construc- 
tion. 


Reconstruction. 


Com- 
pleted. 


Cost (ap- 
proximate). 


Com- 
pleted. 


Cost (ap- 
proximate). 




Cubic feet. 
43, 992, 000, 000 
33,094,300.000 
5,260,000.000 
3,157,900,000 
7,732,900.01)0 
3, 100, 000, 000. 


1884 
1884 
1884 
1895 
1886 
1913 


$230,000 
95,000 
115,000 
122,000 
95.000 
77,200 


1900 
1902 
1904 

1909 
1907 


$154,200 








112.000 




101.000 




118,500 


Gull Lake . . 











Under act of Congress dated August 19, 1890, the sum of $150,000 
was appropriated to be paid to the Chippewa Indians for flowage 
rights. 

In addition to the above, surveys and flowage rights since 1898 
cost $160,700. 



4. OPERATING AND CARE OF RESERVOIRS AT HEADWATERS OF 
MISSISSIPPI RIVER. 

Before 1894 the expenses of operation were paid from the appro- 
priations for construction. By act of August 18, 1894, the " care, 
preservation, and maintenance " of the reservoirs were included 
under the appropriation for "Operating and care of canals and other 
works of navigation." Annual allotments have since been made 
from that appropriation. 

The care, preservation, and maintenance of the reservoirs include 
repairs to dams, dikes, buildings, roads, telephone lines, etc., and the 
payment of salaries to dam tenders and gauge readers. 

The reservoirs are operated mainly with a view to the improvement 
of navigation on the Mississippi River, but with due regard to other 
legitimate interests. Incidentally they are of great benefit m miti- 
gating floods and in regulating the How of water for power pur- 



APPENDIX. 1889 

poses. No definite schedule can be determined beforehand, but the 
following are the general rules observed in operation : 

(a) The discharge must not, by operation of the reservoirs, be re- 
duced below the normal low-water flow of the streams affected. This 
rule is necessary in the interest of manufacturers. 

( b ) When logs arrive in the reservoir, they must be sluiced through. 
Transportation of logs by floating is a form of commerce and the 
main form of commerce on the streams affected by the reservoirs. It 
is dangerous to the dams to allow accumulations of logs, so that they 
must be sluiced through even in times of flood. 

(c) The winter flow is so regulated as to make room for 39,000,- 
000,000 cubic feet of water at the end of winter. This is the 
amount ordinarily to be expected in the spring floods. 

(d) From the spring thaw until the dry season of summer (ordi- 
narily until about July 10) as much water is retained in the reservoirs 
as possible, subject to rules (a) and (b). 

(e) When the gauge at St. Paul has fallen nearly to 3 feet, water 
is released so as to keep the gauge at this reading. If there is not 
enough water for this purpose, then the greatest constant depth 
possible is maintained. 

(/) When during the low-water stage there is not sufficient depth 
for the steamer plying between Aitkin and Grand Rapids and the 
quantity of water in the reservoirs is sufficient, enough water is re- 
leased, on request, to make a trip possible. This use of the reservoirs 
is occasional. 

As a result the river has been maintained during the summers of 
most years at a navigable stage in its upper portion and from St. 
Paul to Lake Pepin. Flood heights in the Mississippi have been 
reduced, often by several feet, and the benefit to manufacturing 
interests, due to the more uniform flow, has been great. 

For capacities of reservoirs, maps of region, and comparison of 
rainfall and run-off, see Annual Eeport of the Chief of Engineers for 
1896, page 1841, and for 1913, pages 2427-2428. For break in Pine 
River Reservoir, see Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 
1896, page 1844, and for 1897, page 2144. For diagrams showing how 
much water had been stored each year in each reservoir, see A nnual 
Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1900, page 2798. For report 
of Board of Engineers upon matters connected with the operation of 
the reservoirs, see Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 
1906, page 1443. 

6. MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN BRAINERD AND GRAND RAPIDS, 

MINN. 

Work of snagging, bowlder removal, etc., was done under a proj- 
ect now expired for " Improving Mississippi River above the Falls 
of St. Anthony." 

By the river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, this improvement 
was added to the project for " Reservoirs at headwaters of Mississippi 
River," and during the fiscal years 1902 to 1909, inclusive, was in- 
cluded in annual reports for that work. Under this project the sum 
of $19,000.96 was expended. As a result the channel between Brainerd 
and Grand Rapids was greatly improved by the removal of snags, 
bowlders, and overhanging trees. 

8373°— eng 1915 119 



1890 EEPOKT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 
8. MINNESOTA RIVER, MINN. 

The original project, adopted in 1867, provided for the removal 
of snags and bowlders from the mouth to Yellow Medicine River, a 
distance of 237 miles. The original estimate of cost was $37,500, 
which was increased in 1869 to $52,500. Work was carried on sys- 
tematically until 1879, and the project was practically completed by 
that time. In 1888 Congress appropriated $10,000 to be used in pro- 
tecting the banks of the river at Belle Plaine, but that work was not 
done, and in 1892 authority was granted for the use of the money in 
building a low dam near the mouth of the river for the purpose of 
providing slack- water navigation to Shakopee, Fort Snelling Chute 
being made the main outlet of the river. The dam was built in 1893, 
and while it was of great assistance to navigation it occasioned com- 
plaints on account of high water. Congress, in 1902, authorized its 
removal in the discretion of the Secretary of War, and in 1908 it was 
taken out. 

Above Le Sueur, 88 miles from the mouth, the act of Congress ap- 
proved March 15, 1901, permits the erection of fixed bridges, with 
minimum clearances at ordinary low water, as follows: Horizontal, 
10 feet; vertical, 20 feet, between Le Sueur and Mankato, and 15 feet 
between Mankato and Big Stone Lake. 

9. RED RIVER OF THE NORTH, MINN. AND N. DAK. 

The project for the Red River, adopted in 1876, provided for 
dredging and removal of obstructions from Breckenridge to the 
international boundary and the construction of a lock and dam to 
overcome the fall at Goose Rapids, the whole being with a view to 
obtaining channels as follows: 

Breckenridge to Moorhead, 97 miles, a channel capable of being navigated 
during high and medium stages of water. 

Moorhead to Grand Forks, 155 miles, a cnannel 50 feet wide and 3 fern deep 
at low water. 

Grand Forks to the northern boundary line, 143.5 miles, a channel GO feet 
wide and 4 feet deep at low water. 

The estimated cost was $364,598.17. This project was modified, as 
follows: In 1883 the estimated cost was increased to $398,598.17. In 
1887 the proposed lock and clam at Goose Rapids was dropped from 
the project and the estimate reduced to $252,598.37. In 1893 the 
estimate was increased to $310,320. 

The improvement of Red Lake River was added to the project in 
1896. It was proposed to provide a depth of 3 feet by dredging and 
removal of bowlders from Thief River Falls to the head of Red Lake. 
The amount authorized by Congress to be spent on this work was 
$9,000. The total estimate for both rivers was therefore $319,320. 

10. WARROAD HARBOR AND W ABROAD RIVER. MINN. 

The river and harbor act of 1899. as amended by the act approved 
June 6, 1900, appropriated $3,000, or so much thereof as might be neces- 
sary, for improving the mouth of Warroad River. Minn. Nothing 
was done under this appropriation beyond making an examination 
and survey. 



APPENDIX. 1891 

The original project was adopted in 1902, and provided for build- 
ing a dredge and dredging in the harbor a channel sufficient for 
boats drawing 7 feet of water. The estimated cost was $45,000. 
This project was modified in 1905 so as to provide for a channel 100 
feet wide and 7 feet deep from the inner end of the harbor channel 
to the boat landing at Warroad, with a turning basin for boats at 
the inner end, at an estimated cost of $35,000. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE KANSAS CITY, 
MO., DISTRICT. 



1. MISSOURI RIVER. 

The early appropriations were for the removal of obstructions and 
later for the improvement of selected localities. The acts continu- 
ally changed the geographical limits of the divisions of the river. 
The first division of the river into sections was made by the river 
and harbor act of August 7, 1882, viz, mouth to Sioux City, Iowa 
(807.4 miles) ; Sioux City, Iowa, to Fort Benton, Mont. (1,477.4 
miles). 

In the river and harbor act of July 25, 1912, Congress formally 
recognized three divisions of the river, viz, (a) Kansas City to the 
mouth (392 miles); (b) Kansas City to Sioux City (415.4 miles); 
(c) Sioux City to Fort Benton (1,477.4 miles). The previous proj- 
ects will be given separately for these divisions, and to complete the 
description a fourth section is added, (d) Fort Benton to Stubbs 
Ferry (179 miles). 

(a) Kansas City to the mouth. — Government work on the river 
began as early as 1838, with the appropriation of $40,000 made by 
the act of July 2, 1836, for the Missouri jointly with the Mississippi 
River above the mouth of the Ohio River, to be expended for the 
removal of obstructions, and continued thereafter under annual 
appropriations, for the most part jointly for the Ohio, Mississippi, 
Missouri, and sometimes the Arkansas River, with occasional inter- 
missions, until the act of June 18, 1878, made a separate appropria- 
tion for the Missouri. 

The first improvement work clone by the Government on this sec- 
tion of the river was under the river and harbor act of March 3, 
1879, in accordance with the plans proposed in reports on the exami- 
nations of the river, as follows: At Kansas City, Mo. (S. Doc. No. 37, 
45th Cong., 3d sess.) ; at Glasgow, Mo. (H. Doc. No. 46, 45th Cong., 
3d sess.) ; at Cedar City, Mo. (H. Doc. No. 44, 45th Cong., 3d sess.). 
The plans proposed the protection of valuable property and the 
restoration of boat landings to their former facilities for river 
communication. 

The act of June 14, 1880, included improvement work at Lexington 
and St. Charles under the above plans. 

It is considered that Congress, by the act of August 7, 1882, adopted 
the original project for improving the river, " including such harbors 
on said river now in the course of improvement as in the judgment 
of the Chief of Engineers will benefit commerce and navigation." 



1892 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, TJ. S. ARMY. 

The passage of this appropriation fairly inaugurated the thorough 
and systematic improvement of the Missouri River. The principles 
upon which the proposed work was based and the general plan to be 
followed were published as House Document No. 92, Forty-sixth Con- 
gress, third session, and republished in the Annual Report of the 
Chief of Engineers, 1881, page 1649. The ruling ideas were the pro- 
tection of the concave bends frcm erosion by revetment, the rectifica- 
tion of channel by dikes "to such limits as would insure stability and 
regimen of appropriate uniformity of width and depth," and the re- 
moval of snags. The estimated cost of the work for this section was 
$3,750,000, with appropriate low-water width of 1,020 feet from 
Kansas City to mouth of the Gasconade River and 1,100 feet from 
mouth of Gasconade River to the Mississippi, and a minimum low- 
water channel depth of 6 feet. The Missouri River Commission was 
constituted by act of Congress July 5, 1884, and the same act provides 
for continuing the plan of improvement. 

The river and harbor act of September 19, 1890. modified the origi- 
nal project and directed that, with certain specified exceptions, the 
appropriations should be expended by the Secretary of AVar " in sys- 
tematic improvement of the river from its mouth up according to the 
plans and specifications of the Missouri River Commission, to be ap- 
proved by him in reaches to be designated by them."' 

The effort of the commission was to accomplish a continuous, pro- 
gressive control of the river, contracting it where necessary, giving 
the channel proper direction, and securely holding it in place. Work 
in this direction was done in the vicinity of Kansas City and on the 
first reach of the river, which extended from near Jefferson City to 
the mouth. On 45 miles of this stretch a continuous channel not less 
than 6 feet in depth at low water was obtained on what was originally 
one of the worst parts of the river, in the vicinity of the mouth of the 
Osage. In addition to forming a channel, much new T land was formed 
and much land protected from destruction by the river. The greater 
part of the money appropriated for expenditure under the direction 
of the commission was not applicable to the comprehensive plan 
adopted, and about one-third was diverted to work at separate 
localities. 

The Missouri River Commission was abolished by the river and 
harbor act of June 13, 1902. A condensed description of the works 
on the river executed under its supervision is given in the commis- 
sion's last annual report. (Annual Report, Chief of Engineers, 1902, 
Supplement.) Since 1902 the works of the entire river have been 
consolidated under one district office. 

Previous to the adoption of the present project the work on this 
section of the river was done under allotments and appropriations 
made from the general appropriations for the Missouri River, and 
consisted mainly of repairs to existing works and snagging. The 
amount expended on this section previous to the adoption of the pres- 
ent project was $7,224,050.11. 

The river and harbor act of June 25, 1910, divided the river into 
two sections, viz, Kansas City to mouth and Kansas City to Fort 
Benton. The present project from Kansas City to the mouth was 
adopted July 25, 1912, though work has been carried on in accordance 
with this project since the passage of the act of June 25, 1910. 



APPENDIX. 1893 

(b) Kansas City to Sioux City. — The river and harbor act of 
August 11, 1876, made the first departure from snagging on the Mis- 
souri Eiver in providing for the expenditure of $10,000 for bank pro- 
tection opposite St. Joseph, Mo., and at Nebraska City, Nebr., and 
Eastport, Iowa. The continuance of these projects was made possible 
by the act of June 18, 1878, which in addition authorized improve- 
ments at Fort Leavenworth, Ivans. ; Council Bluffs, Iowa; Omaha, 
Nebr.; and Sioux Chty, Iowa. Succeeding appropriations provided 
for these places and others and authorized local and extended surveys 

Following the act of August 2, 1882, which made a large appro- 
priation for the work, the estimated cost of improving this section 
of the river was placed at $1,250,000, or about $10,000 per mile, on the 
supposition that the work would proceed regularly by reaches instead 
of in a disjointed and arbitrary manner. The contraction of the 
stream to be secured by such works contemplated low-water widths 
from 820 feet at Sioux City to 1,020 feet at the mouth of the Kansas 
River. The act itself provided for the expenditure of $850,000 in 
the improvement of the river from the mouth to Sioux City. Until 
it was adopted the localities demanding protection were each dis- 
tinctly designated in appropriations. The method was attended by 
many disadvantages, since a separate plant was required for each 
locality, and the work had to be prosecuted in accordance with the 
terms of the act, although in some cases the general results might 
have been obtained at less cost and with greater benefit by the adop- 
tion of a more comprehensive and less restricted plan. Under this 
arrangement there was no continuity or relation between the differ- 
ent pieces of work, and navigation was helped but little. The small 
appropriations allotted to any one locality were insufficient to prose- 
cute the work continuously to prompt and proper completion. As a 
result, an undue proportion of the funds was required for repairs to 
old work, since, uncompleted, it was an easy prey to the river. Usu- 
ally the ultimate cost exceeded the amount of the first estimate, which 
was based on the supposition of continuous work; the aggregate 
amount of money expended was considerable, yet the results obtained 
were meagre and incommensurate with the cost. 

Up to 1882 work was carried on in the vicinity of Kansas City, 
Leavenworth, Atchison, and Elwood, Ivans.; Nebraska City, Platts- 
mouth, Omaha, and Covington, Nebr. ; and Eastport, Council Bluffs, 
and Sioux City, Iowa. Obviously there could be no connection be- 
tween these works. Under the plan for systematic and continuous 
improvement on a limited extent of river, most of these places were 
of necessity abandoned, but to prevent entire loss provision was made 
for continuing the incomplete work at Nebraska City, Omaha, and 
Sioux City, since the interests seemed important enough to justify 
this diversion of funds. 

The Missouri Eiver Commission, created in 1884, selected Kansas 
City as the initial point in the general improvement of the lower 
river, but it revetted the caving banks in Little Platte, Parkville, 
Quindaro, and Kaw Bends, the reaches immediately above Kansas 
City, as a preliminary to extending the work down the river. Beyond 
the activities just mentioned, nothing has been accomplished looking 
to a systematic improvement of this division of the river, and the 
appropriations as a rule have been applied with a view to protecting 



1894 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

city water fronts and training the current in the vicinity of bridges 
and improving the approaches thereto. In other localities, as :it St. 
Joseph, where cut-offs have threatened the stability of the river, 
bank-protection works have been installed and maintained with sat- 
isfactory results. Local interests have accorded their cooperation in 
many instances. Since 1902 a snagboat has kept the channel free 
from snags by traversing the district one or more times each season. 

The discontinuance in 1902 of the project from Sioux City to the 
mouth affected that part of the river above Kansas City but little. 
The work proceeded very much as before, as appropriations were 
always obtainable for localities where the need for improvement 
seemed urgent and the work advisable. During its existence the 
commission found itself unable to conserve all the appropriations 
for continuous progressive improvement below Kansas City; de- 
tached localities above that point continued to receive allotments for 
protection from time to time. 

(c) Sioux City to Fort Benton. — None of the early allotments for 
snagging was spent above Sioux City, so that the first work accom- 
plished was done in 1878, following the river and harbor act of 
August 14, 1876, which made available $20,000 for improvement 
above the mouth of the Yellowstone. Under this and succeeding 
appropriations local surveys were made and the channel improved at 
Dauphins Rapids, Cow Island, and other shoals. The work con- 
sisted of the removal of projecting rocks, reefs, and loose bowlders; 
dredging out the coarse gravel bars; and construction of solid dikes 
closing high-water chutes and secondary channels, and of wing dams 
to direct and concentrate the water at the bars. Thus a deeper 
channel was sluiced across shoals, while the pools created above the 
dams reduced the slope of the rapids. 

These operations were conducted on the " Kocky River," as the 
172-mile section between Carroll and Fort Benton came to be known 
through certain features which distinguished it from the rest of the 
river. It possessed a fixed regimen, stable banks, a bed composed 
of rock and gravel, carried little sediment, and was obstructed by few 
snags. The work necessary for its improvement was simple in char- 
acter and lasting in its effects. Work could be carried on at de- 
tached places with the full expectation that all obstacles removed 
would result in permanent benefit to navigation. 

The object sought in " Rocky River " improvement was a suffi- 
ciently deep and unobstructed waterway to accommodate the exist- 
ing commerce, which at that time was heavy. Many boats of ordi- 
nary draft finding the obstacles insurmountable were forced to dis- 
charge their cargoes 125 miles or more below Fort Benton, the re- 
mainder of the route to Benton and destinations farther west being 
covered by teams with difficulty and at great cost. The improve- 
ments through 1883 had extended the navigable low-water depth 84 
miles upstream, and by 1889 boats drawing less than 3i feet could 
make their way to Fort Benton, except at the lowest stages. The 
aim had been to obtain a minimum low-water depth of at least 30 
inches. The increase to be obtained through improvement was always 
less than a foot. 

As the railroads penetrated the country, the commerce by river 
steadily decreased until it became so small that further work on this 



APPENDIX. 1895 

portion of the river was deemed a needless expense, and, accordingly, 
operations were discontinued. The worst obstructions had already 
been removed and the shoals deepened as much as practicable. In 
later years a snag boat removed the obstructions in the channel at 
irregular intervals. 

The so-called " Sandy River " is that part between Carroll and 
Sioux City. Its characteristics were muddy water, shifting sand bars, 
and an unstable channel, with easily and constantly eroding banks. 
The difficulties of navigation were due principally to sand bars, 
snags, and, to a lesser extent, loose rocks, and the width of the river 
was so great in places as to afford little available depth. No definite 

Eroject for the entire division of the river has ever been adopted, 
towever, early estimates placed the cost of complete rectification, in- 
cluding a contraction of the channel to a suitable width, at from 
$38,500 to $50,080 a mile, but it was recognized that the probable 
public benefit which might ensue was incommensurate with this ex- 
pense. Snagging operations have been conducted over the entire 
stretch of river, but bank protection works have of necessity been 
confined to the localities of cities, towns, and steamboat landings 
where the maximum benefits to navigation might be expected to fol- 
low these improvements. 

The first work accomplished was in the vicinity of Sioux City, 
Iowa, and Covington, Nebr., and at Vermilion, S. Dak., under the 
act of March 3, 1879. At Vermilion the banks were eroding rapidly, 
and a cut-off was imminent. Both banks near Sioux City were pro- 
tected as the first step in a plan to rectify the reach and check inroads 
which threatened the safety of Covington and the existence of the 
Sioux City water front. Since 1880 bank-protection work, consisting 
of dikes and revetment, has been built at some period in the vicinity of 
nearly every river town of importance above Sioux City, including, 
among others, Elk Point, Vermilion, Yankton, Pierre, Fort Pierre, 
Bismarck, Mandan, Eockhaven, Washburn, Deapolis, Expansion, 
Williston, Judith, and Fort Benton. 

Most of the early works were experimental and of cheap construc- 
tion, and while they were often effectual, they rarely lasted more than 
one season as the ice or drift brought about their destruction. The 
development of the standard dike and revetment in use at the present 
time came after and through experiments and observations conducted 
through many years with various forms of artificial weeds, brush mat- 
tresses, willow curtains, tripod dikes, wire netting, and other inven- 
tions. 

Besides those at Sioux City, the installations of most magnitude 
have been developed in the vicinities of Elk Point, Pierre, and Bis- 
marck. The problem of the latter place involved complete rectifica- 
tion of the river, requiring the contraction of the channel to a suitable 
width. The works at Pierre aimed to restore the steamboat landing 
and direct the low-water flow along the town front by means of an 
extensive system of dikes and revetment along both banks. Over 1^ 
miles of revetment was built along the left bank near Elk Point to 
combat a tendency of the river to return to an ancient channel, 
thereby flanking the town. The works at other points have been 
mainly for the conservation of city water fronts and steamboat land- 
ings. 



1896 REPORT OP THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, V. S. ARMY. 

In 1891 snagging operations were commenced, and from one to 
three snag boats have been in commission every year since then, except 
when the funds were depleted. The value of their work has been 
very great. Wrecks due to snags were common in the early days of 
navigation, but are comparatively rare now. 

Previous to 1884, and from 1890 to 1902, that portion above Sioux 
City was under a separate district office. From 1884 to 1890 it was 
under the supervision of the Missouri River Commission. Since 1902 
it has been combined with the remainder of the river in one district. 
The division had been an artificial one, made simply for convenience 
of administration, there being no change in the character of the river 
for a long distance above and below Sioux City. 

(d) Fort Benton to Stubbs Ferry. — As far as navigation is con- 
cerned the headwaters of the Missouri are completely and perma- 
nently separated from the river below. Between Fort Benton and 
Great Falls, 49 miles, the river has a descent of 695 feet, with three 
sheer falls of 90, 50, and 26 feet, and numerous rapids and smaller 
cascades. Navigation is impossible, and the section has never been 
regarded as susceptible of improvement. Between Great Falls and 
Stubbs Ferry, however, there have been possibilities of navigation, 
and attempts have been made to improve these, the first work being 
accomplished in 1881 under an appropriation for improving the 
river above the mouth of the Yellowstone. It consisted in the re- 
moval of rocks and the construction of wing dams at two of the worst 
rapids above Cascade, about $15,000 being thus expended. On the 
76-mile reach between Stubbs Ferry and Cascade the average fall 
was 3.73 feet per mile, with depths less than 2.5 feet at a number 
of shoals. Bowlders, a constant succession of gravel shoals, and a 
narrow, sinuous channel in conjunction with a swift current, offered 
serious obstacles to prospective navigation. The work accomplished 
resulted in slightly increased depths at the improved places. 

The original project, based on the survey of 1880 and submitted 
January 23, 1892, revived for a time the improvement above Fort 
Benton in providing for work on the "Long Pool," that 54-mile 
stretch of river between Cascade and Great Falls. With an average 
slope of 0.52 foot per mile, and navigable depths over the greater 
part of the distance, the opportunities for the limited operation of 
light-draft boats were, nevertheless, defeated by several shoals where 
the average low-water depth was less than 2 feet. The project pro- 
posed to obtain a channel 3 feet deep at low water from Great Falls 
to Cascade and 2.5 feet for the remaining distance to Stubbs Ferry. 
The cost was estimated at $115,837.50, but the revised project of 
November 30, 1894, increased the estimate to $165,812.50, and the 
revision of January 4, 1898, raised it still further to $213,646.50, the 
scope of the work being unchanged. 

The river and harbor act of August 18, 1894, extended the upper 
limits of the river under improvement above Sioux City, from Fort 
Benton to Stubbs Ferry, thus enabling appropriations to be applied 
to the renewal of work above the falls. With the funds appropri- 
ated 19 closing and wing dams with an aggregate length of 9,481 
feet were built during the period 1895-1898, and obstructions were 
removed from the channel. In this manner $65,933.73 was expended 
to June 30, 1899, in securing a 2.5-foot channel from Great Falls to 



APPENDIX. 1897 

16 miles above, without producing a noticeable effect on commerce, 
partly due to the shortness of the improved waterway. Upon com- 
pletion of this portion of the project, operations were suspended 
owing to lack of funds and the absence of incentive to further im- 
provement. No appropriations for work above Great Falls were 
made after June 3, 1896. The commerce on this part of the river had 
always been small; in 1895 it was carried by two small passenger 
steamers. 

The unexpended balance of $66.27 was turned into the Treasury 
June 30, 1899, and no appropriations were made thereafter for work 
above Fort Benton. 

2. OSAGE RIVER, MO. 

There were no adopted projects on the Osage River previous to 
the present projects. However, work was done by the State of 
Missouri, probably with some local cooperation, prior to 1870 and 
perhaps as early as 1854. The amount expended by the State of 
Missouri is said to have been $175,000. In a Government reconnois- 
sance of the river in 1870 over 100 brush and stone wing dams were 
observed, the remains of early works, some of which are still to be 
seen in the lower 50 miles of the river. Where suitably located, these 
have been utilized as the foundation of more recent works. 

4. GASCONADE RIVER, MO. 

No project previous to the present project was adopted for the 
Gasconade River. Some wing dams and training walls were built 
by private interests before the United States took hold of the work. 

An unusual condition was found at Pryors Chute. It is current 
report that in the early years a mill race about 3,000 feet long was 
cut by private interests across the neck on the right bank at Pryors 
Bend, for the operation of a mill near the foot of the bend. This 
race was enlarged by erosion and flanking at the mill, which neces- 
sitated a dam at the mill site, until finally the race was as large as 
the main channel. The fall was about 7 feet. 

After the mill was abandoned, due to the excessive cost of main- 
taining the dam, an attempt was made by the Government to repair 
the dam, but the first rise destroyed the work. A training wall was 
later built across the head of the race or chute, as it is now called, 
but this was destroyed. Another dam has been built and its mainte- 
nance is a part of the work carried on under the present project. 

5. KANSAS RIVER, KANS. 

No project was adopted by Congress previous to the present project. 

The first examination of the river by the Government was made in 
1878, and the report, made February _5, 1879, is found on page 1089, 
Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers, 1879. The examination 
extended from Junction City to the mouth. 

The river and harbor act of July 13, 1892, provided for another 
examination of the river. The district officer, as well as the Chief 
of Engineers, considered the examination in 1878 conclusive; there- 
fore none was made in 1892. The report, however, dated February 9, 



1898 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

1893, contains the statement that the river was navigated in early 
days, but that in 1864 the State Legislature of Kansas declared the 
stream unnavigable. This law has not been sustained by the United 
States courts, but obstructing bridges have been built. The river was 
deemed not worthy of improvement by the Government. 

The river suffered a severe flood in 1903, causing a damage of 
$20,000,000 at Kansas City alone. Another flood of smaller propor- 
tions followed in 1904 and another in 1908. A special report on flood 
conditions, encroachments, and bridges, was made in 1904 by a board 
of Engineer officers. (See S. Doc. No. 160, 58th Cong., 2d sess.) 
One important step in the prevention of flood damage, following this 
report of 1904, was the establishment of harbor lines by Congress 
in 1909, from the mouth to Argentine, a distance of about 5 miles, 
a survey for this purpose having been made in 1904. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY, GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE NASHVILLE, 
TENN., DISTRICT. 



1. CUMBERLAND RIVER, TENN. AND KY. 

. (a) Above Nashville. — The first appropriation for the improve- 
ment of the Cumberland River above Nashville was by the river and 
harbor act of August 14, 1876, by which appropriation Congress 
adopted the first project for the improvement of this part of the 
Cumberland River. This project was based on the reports of Jan- 
uary 20, 1871 (Annual Report for 1871, p. 468), and of February 
8, 1872 (Annual Report for 1872, p. 463), for the 36H miles of river 
from the mouth of Laurel River to Nashville, except for the 9 miles 
covered by the Smith Shoals reach; the project for which was based 
on the report of March 10, 1875. (Annual Report for 1875, p. 795.) 
The project for the river, except for the Smith Shoals, provided 
for the excavation of the bars and rock ledges to get additional depth 
of water; for the contraction of the waterway in places in order to 
obtain additional depth by this method; for the removal of snags 
and bowlders from the main channel, and for retaining tributary 
streams in well-determined channels at their junction with the main 
stream. For the Smith Shoals reach, which begins 25 miles below 
the mouth of Laurel River, the project provided for the excavation 
of rock to remove high places in the channel and for the construction 
of wing dams on both sides of the river for the purpose of contract- 
ing the waterway and thus deepening the channel so as to increase 
the aggregate period per year in which coal boats could pass down- 
stream over the Smith Shoals and make such period of navigability 
for the shoals more nearly equal to the naturally longer navigable 
stage in the river below. The project estimate was $70,000 for the 
Smith Shoals reach. $6,600 for the portion of river above Smith 
Shoals, and $213,764 between Smith Shoals and Nashville, making a 
total project estimate of $290,364. The Smith Shoals estimate was 



APPENDIX. 1899 

increased to $100,000 upon recommendation of the district officer in 
1879. (Annual Report for 1879, p. 1267.) 

The first two of the appropriations for the upper Cumberland 
River each designated that $2,000 of the money appropriated be 
applied between Smith Shoals and the Cumberland Falls, but no 
project was ever prepared for the 8.7 miles of river between the 
mouth of the Laurel and the foot of the falls, nor was any money 
ever expended on this short reach of river. The $1,000 appropriated 
was expended in the removal of large bowlders between Laurel River 
and Smith Shoals. Appropriations aggregating $282,000 were made 
and expended between the head of Smith Shoals and Nashville. The 
Smith Shoals project was regarded as completed, and sufficient benefit 
was effected to permit an increase in the traffic carried by rafts and 
coal barges passing downstream over the shoals. Between Smith 
Shoals and Nashville not all of the work originally contemplated 
was completed, but the improvements nevertheless resulted in a 
cleared channel for an increased depth through the principal obstruc- 
tions and in an increased length for the season of navigation. 

Above mouth of Jellico Creek. — The possible navigation on the 
Cumberland River is wholly interrupted by the Cumberland Falls, 
but there is a section above the falls of comparatively flat slope, for 
which Congress undertook the improvement by river and harbor act 
of March 3, 1881. The river between Pineville, Ky., 86 miles above 
the falls, and the mouth of Jellico Creek, 13 miles above the falls, 
was placed under a project of improvement based on a report dated 
November 17, 1880. (Annual Report for 1881, p. 1854.) This proj- 
ect provided for the removal of bowlders, snags, overhanging trees, 
etc., and for the modification of the numerous milldams which con- 
stituted the principal obstructions on this reach, subject to the secur- 
ing of the consent of the owners of the dams. The total estimated 
cost was $55,000. In pursuance of the work under this project Con- 
gress appropriated $15,000, of which $10,000 was expended and 
$5,000 was subsequently transferred to the section between Nashville 
and the head of Smith Shoals. The work done was of practically no 
benefit, as none of the milldams were modified, and the improvemenl 
consisted merely in removal of bowlders, snags, and other obstruc- 
tions of this character. The project for improving the river above 
the falls has been abandoned for many years. 

The river and harbor act of July 5, 1884, appropriated $50,000 for 
improving Cumberland River above Nashville, in accordance with 
the plan proposed in the report of Maj. W. R. King, Corps of En- 
gineers, dated February 26, 1884. (Annual Report for 1884, p. 1663.) 
This plan of improvement was for the construction of locks and 
dams, in order to provide for 5-foot navigation at low water from 
Nashville to the head of Smith Shoals, thus covering also the Smith 
Shoals reach, for which canalization had previously been recom- 
mended in Maj. King's report of February 15, 1882. (Annual Report 
for 1882, p. 1862.) It was proposed to construct 23 locks and dams 
between Nashville and Burnside at an estimated cost of $3,202,922, 
and seven locks and two dams in the Smith Shoals reach, at an esti- 
mated cost of $875,000, or a total of $4,077,922 for the improvement 
from Nashville to the head of Smith Shoals. The locks between 
Nashville and Burnside were to be about 60 feet wide and 250 feet 



1900 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

long between the miter sills. The Smith Shoals locks were to have 
chamber dimensions of 55 feet width and 145 feet length. The report 
of Maj. King stated that in some cases jetties would probably be more 
advantageous than locks and dams, and recommended that Congress 
specify the depth of navigable channel to be secured and that the 
Secretary of War be authorized to adopt the plan of improvement 
best adapted to the physical conditions of each section of the river. 
He stated that a depth of 4 feet at ordinary low water would prob- 
ably be sufficient for all purposes of navigation. 

The report of the Board of Engineers, dated March 30, 1887 (An- 
nual Report for 1888, p. 1622), fixed the available dimensions of the 
locks at 52 feet width and 280 feet length, with lifts varying from 
10 to 12 feet. In 1891 it was recommended that the project estimate 
for the construction of the 23 locks and dams between Nashville and 
Burnside be increased to $5,750,000 and that the Smith Shoals esti- 
mate be increased to $1,750,000 to provide for 7 locks and dams, or 
a total estimated cost of $7,500,000 for the canalization from Nash- 
ville to the head of Smith Shoals by 30 locks and dams. (Annual 
Report for 1891, p. 2270.) The report of the Board of Engineers, 
dated November 25, 1890 (not printed but referred to in Annual 
Report for 1892, p. 1933), fixed the minimum depths on the miter 
sills of the locks at 6| feet and the low-water navigable depth 
to be obtained at 6 feet. Under the approval of the Chief of 
Engineers, dated August 12, 1895, the number of locks and dams in 
the Smith Shoals reach was reduced to six, no change being made in 
the project estimate. (Annual Report for 1896, p. 1915.) One of 
the 23 locks and dams proposed between Nashville and Burnside was 
also omitted, but the date and authority for this modification can not 
be ascertained. This modification was first referred to in 1905. when 
it was stated that the plan of improvement included the construction 
of 22 locks and dams below Burnside. (Annual Report for 1906, 
p. 451.) Upon recommendation of the district officer in 1896, the 
estimated cost of canalizing the river from Nashville to the head of 
Smith Shoals was increased to $8,500,000 (stated erroneously as 
$9,000,000 in Annual Report for 1896, p. 1916, but corrected in" An- 
nual Report for 1897, p. 2224). 

Thus the several modifications in plan and estimate for the canal- 
ization between Nashville and the head of Smith Shoals resulted in 
a plan for the construction of 28 locks and dams, at a total estimated 
cost of $8,500,000. It is under this project, as modified, that the 
existing locks and dams have been constructed, but the project itself 
has been modified by the elimination of the construction of locks and 
dams between Nos. 7 and 21 and of the 7 locks and dams proposed 
above the existing Lock and Dam No. 21. 

The first appropriation under the canalization project, amounting 
to $50,000, was expended in open-channel work, with a view to ascer- 
taining how far wing dams and training walls could be used in com- 
bination with locks and dams for the purpose of improvement, but 
after this expenditure was made the contraction method of improve- 
ment was discontinued. Since this expenditure was not applied to 
canalization, it has not been charged to the present canalization pro- 
ject, but is considered as an expenditure under a previous project. In 
the Smith Shoals reach the river was surveyed from Burnside to 



APPENDIX. 1901 

Eockcastle River, detailed surveys being made for the lock sites and 
abstracts of title being prepared for the lands necessary. The 
amount expended for these purposes was $20,252.94, but no appro- 
priation has ever been made by Congress for the actual construction 
of the locks and dams proposed in this reach. This expenditure, also, 
has been charged to previous projects in view of the fact that the 
project for the Smith Shoals reach has been abandoned. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, authorized the Cumber- 
land River Improvement Co. of Kentucky to improve the Cumber- 
land River and tributaries, including the South Fork, above the 
town of Burnside, Ivy., at its own expense, but under Government 
supervision, by the construction of locks and dams equal in size and 
capacity to existing locks and dams on the Cumberland River, the 
corporation being granted the use of the water power thus developed. 
The franchise granted by this act lapsed because of the failure of 
the corporation to begin work within 18 months after the completion 
of Lock and Dam No. 21, as required by the act. 

The total amount expended on the Cumberland River above Nash- 
ville on old projects of improvement amounted to $366,252.94, which 
represents the aggregate of the expenditures mentioned under the 
different projects described above. 

(b) Below Nashville.— From July 17, 1832, to July 7, 1838, Con- 
gress made five appropriations for improving the Cumberland River, 
Tenn. and Ky., aggregating $155,000, $20,000 of which was to be 
expended below Nashville and $135,000 on the river generally, but all 
the appropriations for the above period were expended below Nash- 
ville to improve the worst localities. 

Between 1838 and 1871 no appropriations for this river were made. 
The original project (open-channel work), which provided specific- 
ally for operations on this section, was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of March 3, 1871, based on project submitted January 20, 
1871. (Annual Report for 1871, p. 468.) The work proposed was as 
follows: To excavate the bars and rock ledges, in order to get an 
additional depth of water; to contract the waterways in places, in 
order to get the requisite depth ; to remove snags and bowlders from 
the main channel; and to restrain tributary streams in well-deter- 
mined channels at their junction with the river. The estimated cost 
was $248,821. 

To increase the depth of water at the shoals in Kentucky Chute, at 
the junction of the Cumberland with the Ohio River, a board of engi- 
neer officers in 1888 recommended the construction of a dike near 
Smithland, Ky., at an estimated cost of $129,600. (Annual Report 
for 1888, p. 1626.) The river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, 
allotted $30,000 from the appropriation for improving Cumberland 
River below Nashville, to be expended in improving the mouth of 
the river, as recommended. 

Appropriations aggregating $305,000 were made and expended, 
thus completing the above project. The expenditures under the old 
project have resulted in lengthening the season of navigation by 
giving an increased depth at low water, combined ' with greater 
security in the passage of obstructions. 



1902 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE CHATTANOOGA, 

TENN., DISTRICT. 



1. TENNESSEE RIVER, TENN., ALA. AND KY. 

In making appropriations Congress formerly recognized three 
divisions of this stream, viz, (a) above Chattanooga, Tenn. (188 
miles) ; (b) Chattanooga, Tenn., to Riverton, Ala. (237.6 miles) ; 
(c) below Riverton, Ala. (226.5 miles). The previous projects will 
be given separately for these divisions. 

(a) ABOVE CHATTANOOGA. 

The river and harbor act of August 30, 1852. appropriated $50,000 
for improving the Tennessee River " in conformity with the esti- 
mates of the War Department of July 13, 1852." This project was 
for the portion of the river between Knoxville and Kellys Ferry 
(22.4 miles below Chattanooga) and contemplated securing a depth 
of 2 feet at extreme low water over all bars in this reach of the river 
by contraction works and by the excavation of a small amount of 
rock and gravel, and the removal of loose rocks, logs, snags, etc. ; 
and provided for supplying the necessary aids for "warping" the 
boats through swift water. 

It is considered that Congress, by the river and harbor act of June 
10, 1872, adopted as the next, or second, project for improvement 
of the river above Chattanooga the plans proposed in the reports 
of the examinations of the river between Kingston and Chattanooga 
(Annual Report for 1871, p. 502), and between Knoxville and King- 
ston (H. Ex. Doc. No. 76, 42d Cong., 2d sess.). This project pro- 
vided for securing a channel 3 feet deep and 110 feet wide at extreme 
low water over all of the shoals between Knoxville and Chattanooga 
(183.5 miles) by the removal of sand, gravel, snags, isolated rocks 
and bowlders, and a small amount of solid rock, and by the construc- 
tion of contraction works. The estimated cost of the work between 
Knoxville and Kingston was $125,000, no cost being given for the 
remaining portion of the river. In 1874 the cost of the whole im- 
provement was estimated at $175,000, based on the quantities given 
in the project reports. (Annual Report for 1874, p. 572.) This 
estimate was increased in 1877 to $225,000 (Annual Report for 
1877, p. 579) ; in 1884 to $300,000 (Annual Report for 1884, p. 251) ; 
and, finally, in 1891 to $340,000 (Annual Report for 1891, p. 2255). 
The amount expended on this project was $328,255.83. Though the 
project provided for 3-foot depth, this depth was rarely obtained by 
the work done. 

Congress by river and harbor act of August 18, 1894. adopted the 
third and last of the previous projects for the Tennessee River above 
Chattanooga, as submitted in the report of the survey ordered by act 
of September 19, 1890. (H. Ex. Doc. No. 252, 52d*Cong., 2d sess.) 
This project applied to the section of the river between Chattanooga 
and the junction of the Holston and French Broad Rivers. The plan 
of improvement was the same as that under the preceding project. 
The object was to improve the river to the best advantage without 



APPENDIX. 1903 

attempting to obtain the full 3-foot depth at first, except where blast- 
ing was required. The estimated cost of the improvement was 
$650,000. A revised estimate, made June 1, 1907, and approved June 
12, 1907, placed the cost of completing the improvement at $1,080,000. 
in addition to the $629,000 previously appropriated for this and the 
preceding project. The amount expended on this project was 
1 $481,59319. 

The work done under previous projects improved some of the worst 
shoals and cleared the channel of surface obstructions so as to make 
navigation possible except at low stages. 

(5) CHATTANOOGA TO RIVERTON. 

Open-channel work. — The first project adopted by Congress for 
any improvement in this section was that adopted by the river and 
harbor act of August 30, 1852, for the portion of the river between 
Knoxville and Kellys Ferry, which included the first 22.4 miles of the 
section below Chattanooga. For description of this project see under 
previous projects for above Chattanooga. 

It is considered that by the river and harbor act of July 25, 1868, 
Congress adopted as the next or second project for the improvements 
in the section of the river between Chattanooga and Riverton the 
plans proposed in the report of the survey of the river between Chat- 
tanooga and the mouth (H. Ex. Doc. No. 271, 40th Cong., 2d sess.) 
as far as they related to open-channel work. This project contem- 
plated securing a channel 3 feet deep at low water between Chat- 
tanooga and Decatur and between Florence and the mouth by channel 
excavation, by contraction works, and by the removal of isolated ob- 
structions, at an estimated cost of $90,000 for the reach between Chat- 
tanooga and Decatur, and $40,000 for that between Florence and the 
mouth. Apparently the width contemplated was 100 feet. The 
amount expended under this project was 2 $583,461.21. 

By the river and harbor act of March 2, 1907, Congress adopted as 
the third and last of the previous projects for improvement by open- 
channel work in this section the plans proposed in the report of the 
survey ordered by act of March 3, 1899, from Scott Point to Lock 
A. (H. Doc. No. 50, 57th Cong., 1st sess.) This project contem- 
plated securing a channel 5 feet deep at low water for a width suit- 
able for navigation over the reach of the river between the Hales Bar 
Lock and Lock A by contraction works, bank protection, channel 
excavation, and the removal of snags and similar obstructions. The 
estimated cost of the improvement, as given in the report, was 
$770,640; but a revised estimate of June 1, 1907, based on increased 
unit prices, placed the cost of the work remaining to be done at that 
time at $1,231,500. The river and harbor act of June 25, 1910, 
adopted the report of the Board of Engineers, dated February 1. 
1909 (Rivers and Harbors Com. Doc. No. 12, 61st Cong., 2d sess.), 
thus modifying this project so as to include the improvement of the 
reach of the river between the Florence bridge and the head of Col- 

1 Includes the expenditure of $170 received from sales. 

2 Corrected_ by an amount of $12, 043. 32 expended below Riverton (Annual Report for 
1891 p. 225 < ) and previously reported in error as expended between Chattanooga and 
Riverton and exclusive of reimbursements amounting to $28.21 included in the expendi- 
tures given in previous reports hut inclusive of the expenditure of $906.87 received from 



1904 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

bert Shoals, at an estimated cost of $250,000, making a total of 
$1,481,500 as the revised estimate for the improvement of all of the 
river between Chattanooga and Riverton, with the exception of the 
portion between Lock A and the Florence bridge, and the portions 
under improvement by the Hales Bar Lock and Dam and the Colbert 
Shoals Canal. The width of channel to be obtained in the Florence 
to Colbert Shoals section was stated to be 150 feet. The total amount 
expended under this project was $417,G62.70. 1 

The work done under the previous projects for open-channel work 
improved some of the worst localities and cleared the channel of 
surface obstructions so as to make navigation possible except at low 
stages. 

Muscle Shoals improvement. — It is considered that Congress, by the 
river and harbor act of March 3, 1871, adopted as the project for the 
improvement of these shoals the plans proposed in the report of the 
survey of the river between Chattanooga and the mouth (H. Ex. Doc. 
No. 271, 40th Cong., 2d sess.), in so far as it related to this part of the 
river. This report provided for a canal in three divisions on the 
north side of the river, each 100 feet wide and 6 feet deep, with locks 
300 feet between miter sills and 70 feet wide. The first division was 
to be about 11 miles long and have five locks to surmount Elk River 
Shoals. The estimated cost of this work was $2,463,089.95, which the 
district officer believed should be increased by 15 per cent. A dam 
across the river about a mile below Browns Ferry was suggested as a 
means of reducing the above estimate by about 50 per cent, but data 
was not at hand to make an estimate on this basis. 

The second division of the canal was to be obtained by enlarging to 
the required dimensions the existing canal around Big Muscle Shoals, 
which had been abandoned and had fallen into decay and disintegra- 
tion. The canal was completed by the State of Alabama in 1836, and 
when completed had a width of from 60 to 70 feet and a depth of 6 
feet, with 17 locks 32 feet wide and 120 feet between the miter sills and 
average lifts of 5 feet. The district officer increased the estimated 
cost of reconstructing this canal to $1,500,000. 

The third division of the canal was to be about 4^ miles long and 
surmount the Little Muscle Shoals. The cost was approximately esti- 
mated at $500,000. 

Though not specifically stated in any subsequent acts, it has been 
considered that the following modifications of this project had the 
approval of Congress. The report of the survey between Browns 
Ferry and Florence (Annual Report for 1872, p. 495), ordered by act 
of March 3, 1871, proposed the first modified plan. This plan also 
provided for a canal in three divisions, as before, and, in addition, in- 
cluded three dams across the river — one below Browns Ferry, one be- 
low Elk River Shoals, and one below Campbells Ferry. The canals 
were to be 100 feet wide and 6 feet deep, and the locks 300 feet long 
between miter sills and 60 feet wide. The Elk River Shoals division 
was to have 9 miles of canal trunk, with 3 locks and 2 guard locks, and 
2 crib dams across the river, at an estimated cost of $1,115,000. The 
Big Muscle Shoals division was to have a new guard lock, 15 miles of 
canal trunk were to be widened, dams and culverts constructed, and 
the 17 old locks rebuilt, at a total estimated cost of $1,465,000. The 

1 Includes the expenditure of $56.63 received from sales. 



APPENDIX. 1905 

Little Muscle Shoals division was to have 6^ miles of canal trunk, 3 
lift locks and 2 guard locks, and a crib dam across the river, at an 
estimated cost of $902,500; making the total estimate for the three 
divisions, after allowing for contingencies. $3,676,000. This estimate 
was increased by later surveys to $4,003,000. 

The report of the survey from the head of Browns Island to Lambs 
Ferry (Annual Report for 1877, pp. 579 and 590), proposed a modi- 
fied project for the improvement of Elk River Shoals by the construc- 
tion of a canal along the south bank of the river. This canal was to 
have three locks — one near each end of Gilchrist Island and one about 
a mile above the head of the island. A dam was to connect the head 
of Gilchrist Island with the foot of Browns Island so as to form a 
canal. These works were to be supplemented by channel excavation 
and the construction of riprap dams. A channel 100 feet wide was 
also to be excavated through Nances Reef below the lower lock. It 
was estimated that these improvements could be made for $736,249, 
or $378,750 less than the lowest estimate for the canal on the north 
side of the river. The district officer in his report (Annual Report 
for 1877, p. 582) proposed to reduce the number of locks in the Big 
Muscle Shoals division to 10, and the number was finally reduced to 
9 (Annual Report for 1879, p. 1250). The district officer also pro- 
posed (Annual Report for 1877, p. 583) to improve the Little Muscle 
Shoals division by channel excavation and contraction works on the 
north side of the river, so as to give " as great depth of water on them 
as can be obtained throughout a considerable portion of the river, 
both above and below Muscle Shoals." It was decided later to omit 
the lock proposed at the foot of Gilchrist Island and to excavate a 
canal prism on the shore between the other two locks and build the 
retaining dam from the foot of Browns Island to the upper lock. 
This was the final modification of any consequence. 

The project, as finallv modified, was reported as practically com- 
pleted in 1890. The total cost of the improvement was $3,191,726.50. 
A satisfactory depth was not obtained, however, in the portions of 
the project section that were improved by open-channel work, and an 
extreme low-water depth of 1 foot is found in the reach above Lock A. 

(c) BELOW RIVERTON. 

The first project which provided for any improvement of the Ten- 
nessee River below Riverton was included in a project which is con- 
sidered to have been adopted by the river and harbor act of July 25, 
1868. For details of this project, see description of second previous 
project for the open-channel work in the section between Chattanooga 
and Riverton. Under this project $12,043.32 1 was expended below 
Riverton. (Annual Report for 1891, p. 2257.) 

The second and last previous project for this section of the river is 
considered to have been adopted by the river and harbor act of Sep- 
tember 19, 1890, which authorized the protection of Livingston Point, 
at the mouth of the river, according to the recommendation of the 
officer in charge. (H. Ex. Doc. No. 172, 51st Cong., 1st sess.) The 
plan adopted was the revetment of the banks with stone and brush 

1 This amount has previously been included in the expenditures between Cha ttanooga 
and Riverton. 

8373°— eng 1915 120 



1906 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, IT. S. ARMY. 

and the construction of a pile-and-stone dike alone the crest of the 
weakest point, where the Ohio cuts through at high stages, at an 
estimated cost of $180,000. The river and harbor act of August 18, 
1891, extended this project in scope, so as to provide for the removal 
of snags and other obstructions to navigation below Riverton, and 
also authorized a survey of this portion of the river to be made. The 
maps of this survey were completed in 1897, but no detailed report 
was ever made. An estimate made in 1898, and based on this survey, 
showed that 90,385 cubic yards of rock and 563,431 cubic yards of 
gravel were to be removed to obtain a channel 150 feet vide and 5 
feet deep at low water. (Annual Report for 1901, p. 2139.) The 
Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1901, page 406, states 
that the project is to obtain by dredging a low-water channel not less 
than 5 feet deep and 150 feet wide. The amount expended on this 
project was $534,051.92. 1 Under this project Livingston Point was 
protected, and many of the shoals were improved by dredging. 

2. FRENCH BROAD RIVER, N. C. AND TENN. 

An examination of the French Broad River, N. C, from Brevard 
to the Buncombe (Henderson-Buncombe) County line, was made in 
1874 and 1875 under authority of the river and harbor act of June 
23, 1874. (Annual Report for 1875, p. 817.J The examination of 
the French Broad River was continued in 1875 from the Henderson- 
Buncombe County line to its junction with the Holston under au- 
thority of the river and harbor act of March 3. 1875. (Annual Re-' 
port for 1876, p. 718.) In order to obtain sufficient information to 
form definite plans for the expenditure of the $10,000 appropriated 
by the river and harbor act of August 14, 1876, the river was sur- 
veyed in 1877 from Brevard to the head of Big Buck Shoals, about 
30 miles. (Annual Report for 1878, p. 525.) For the same reason 
a survey was made from Smiths Bridge, at Asheville, to the foot of 
Long Shoals, about 12 miles above Smiths Bridge and 4^- miles be- 
low the head of Big Buck Shoals, on which to base a plan for the 
expenditure of the $5,000 appropriated by the river and harbor act 
of August 2, 1882, for " continuing improvement from Smiths Bridge 
up." (Annual Report for 1883, p. 832.) The report of the survey 
from Brevard to Big Buck Shoals contained three plans for the im- 
provement of this reach — (1) by locks and dams, (2) by lateral dams, 
(3) by short wing dams and groins — each of which Mas to be sup- 
plemented by channel excavation. The third method was adopted 
as being best adapted to the river and least expensive. This project 
contemplated securing a channel 31 feet wide and 2\ feet deep at low 
Avater, at an estimated cost of $45,500. The estimated cost of im- 
proving the reach of the river from Smiths Bridge to the foot of 
Long Shoals, by the methods adopted for the section between Brevard 
and Big Buck Shoals, was $76,000 for a channel 35 feet wide and -2] 
feet deep, making the total estimated cost of all the improvements 
proposed in North Carolina $121,500. From 1876 to 1882 appropria- 
tions were made aggregating $43,000. and this sum was applied 
towards carrying out the project for the improvement of the sections 
of the river from Brevard to the head of Big Buck Shoals and l>e- 

1 Includes $572.96 received from sales and $276.93 received as damages to dredges. 



APPENDIX. 1907 

tween the foot of Long Shoals and Asheville. The $38,000 appro- 
priated for the section above Big Buck Shoals was expended in im- 
proving about 26 miles of this reach, where a channel 2J- feet deep 
and 35 to 40 feet wide was obtained, while the $5,000 appropriated for 
" above Smiths Bridge " was expended in improving the first 4^ 
miles of the river above Asheville, the channel dimensions obtained 
not being definitely stated. The work done gave somewhat improved 
conditions for navigation, but little, if any, use was made of the 
improvement, and the work has been abandoned since 1885. 

3. HIWASSEE RIVER, GA., N. C, AND TENN. 

A project for improving the Hiwassee River from its mouth to 
Savannah Ford (41.6 miles) was adopted by the river and harbor act 
of August 14, 1876, based on report of an examination dated October 
19, 1874. (Annual Report for 1875, p. 809.) This project con- 
templated securing a channel 40 feet wide and 2 feet deep at low 
water by the excavation of rock reefs and gravel bars, the construc- 
tion of riprap dams, and the removal of snags and other surface ob- 
structions, at a total estimated cost of $20,000. This estimate was in- 
creased to $30,000 in 1878 (Annual Report for 1878, p. 762), followed 
by a further increase of $4,000 in 1882 (Annual Report for 1882, p. 
1848), and was finally increased to $36,500 in 1885 (Annual Report 
for 1885, p. 1764). The work done under this project consisted in 
the removal of a large number of snags and overhanging trees, the 
excavation of about 3,000 cubic yards of reefs and bowlders, and the 
construction of numerous dams, estimated to contain 7,500 cubic 
yards of riprap stone. The work done was mainly below Charleston, 
Tenn., 18.9 miles above the mouth, and resulted in a partial improve- 
ment of the river at 14 different localities, securing an increased depth 
of channel and a consequent lengthening of the season of navigation. 
The amount appropriated under this project was $36,500, of which 
$36,427.07 was expended and $72.93 transferred to the present project. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF THE OHIO RIVER BY CONSTRUCTION OF LOCKS 
AND DAMS. 

In 1820 Congress made an appropriation for a survey of the Ohio 
River from Louisville to the Mississippi River and down that river 
to its mouth. This survey was made in 1821 by Capts. Young and 
Poussin, of the Topographical Engineers, and Lieut. Tuttle, of the 
Engineers. In 1824 an appropriation of $75,000 was made for the 
improvement of certain sand bars in the Ohio and for the removal 
of snags from the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers. During the follow- 
ing year, Maj. S. H. Long, Topographical Engineers, began the con- 
struction of the first dike on the Ohio at Henderson, Ky. 

Under a charter granted by the State of Kentucky in 1825 a stock 
company constructed the Louisville & Portland Canal around the 
falls of the Ohio, which was opened for traffic in 1830. The United 
States was one of the original stockholders in this company and 
gradually increased its holdings until on February 8, 1855, all stock 
was owned by the United States except five shares held by the direc- 



1908 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

tors to qualify them to hold such office. These directors Continued to 
manage the canal until the United States assumed control on June 11, 
1874, purchasing the remaining five shares of stock. Between 1808 
and 1873 the United States, although not managing the canal, made 
a series of appropriations for increasing its navigable capacity. Ap- 
propriations made since 1874 have been applied to its further im- 
provement. 

In 1830 work was begun on the removal of rocks at Grand Chain, 
and dikes at Scuffletown, Sisters, and French and Cumberland 
Islands were constructed in 1831 and 1832. The first permanent 
work above the falls was the dam at Browns Island, constructed in 
1836. The construction of dikes and cut-off dams was in pursuance 
of the project of regulation of depths by closing island chutes, and 
by narrowing the channel by dikes projecting from the bank, in order 
to concentrate the water upon bars to cause their removal. This 
method of improvement was carried on at many places until the 
practical discontinuance of appropriations for the Ohio in 1844. 
From 1826 to 1844 appropriations were made for the improvement of 
the Ohio with approximate regularity, but from 1845 to 1866 only 
two appropriations were made, one of which was quite small and the 
other only $95,000. Upon the resumption of appropriations in 1866 
the method of improvement by works of contraction was resumed, 
together with the removal of snags, wrecks, and other obstructions 
and the cutting of channels by dredging through bars not regulated. 
Ice harbors have also been constructed at various points above the 
falls. 

While the method of improving the navigable channel of the river 
by means of dikes and cut-off dams was believed to be successful 
for the purpose of maintaining a minimum navigable depth of 3 
feet, it was recognized at an early date that to provide for the ac- 
commodation of coal fleets the best method of improving the river. 
at least in the upper part of its course, was by means of locks and 
dams. The first recorded proposition for this purpose was made by 
Mr. W. Milnor Roberts, civil engineer, in 1870. In April, 1872, i 
board of engineers was appointed to examine and report upon the 
applicability of certain plans for movable hydraulic gates for chutes 
and locks. In 1874 Maj. W. E. Merrill, Corps of Engineers, recom- 
mended the construction of 13 locks and movable dams with Chanoine 
wickets between Pittsburgh and AVheeling, and stated that there is 
no doubt of the absolute necessity of using locks in any rational 
plan for improving the upper Ohio so as to secure a 6-foot naviga- 
tion. In 1875 Maj. Merrill expressed himself in favor of extending 
the movable-dam system throughout the entire river, qualifying his 
statement as to its applicability below the falls of the Ohio by say- 
ing that, although not assured of its serviceability there, it was a 
better system than one of permanent dams and the only other system 
promising 6 or 7 feet of navigation at low water, the system of 
dikes not being likely to afford more than 4 feet at extreme low- 
water, and then only after an immense development of such works. 
The river and harbor act of March 3, 1875, appropriated $100,000 
"to be used for and applied toward the construction of a movable 
dam, or a dam with adjustable gates, for the purpose of testing sub- 
stantially the best method of improving, permanently, the navigation 



APPENDIX. 1909 

of the Ohio River and its tributaries.'' This dam was constructed 
at Davis Island. 

The river and harbor act of August 11, 1888, directed the ap- 
pointment of a board of three Engineer officers, whose duty it was 
to examine and report as to the feasibility and advisability of im- 
proving the Ohio River below Pittsburgh by means of movable dams. 
This board recommended the construction of four dams below Davis 
Island, it being proposed to locate the lowermost one, No. 5, just 
below the mouth of the Beaver River. As constructed, however, No. 
5 is located just above the mouth of the Beaver River. The river and 
harbor act of September 19. 1890, provided funds for the construc- 
tion of a dam at or below the mouth of the Beaver River, Pa., " at 
such locality as the Secretary of War may consider most advan- 
tageous." This dam, No. 6, is located at a point 3.7 miles below the 
mouth of Beaver River. The initial appropriation for construction 
of Locks and Dams Nos. 2, 3, 4, and 5 was made by river and harbor 
act of June 3, 189G. The river and harbor act of July 18, 1892, pro- 
vided funds for purchase of site for Dam No. 2. 

The river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, authorizing a survey of 
the Ohio River from Pittsburgh to Marietta, called for a report on 
" the number of movable dams necessary to improve said river be- 
tween said points to provide 6 feet of water therein at low water and 
the probable location of the necessary dams, as well as the probable 
cost thereof." This report (H. Doc. No. 122, 55th Cong., 3d sess.) 
provided for a system of 18 locks between the points named, and 
appropriations were made by river and harbor acts as follows for 
beginning the construction of the locks and dams (Dams Nos. 1 to 6 
having alreadv been provided for, as shown above) : Dams Nos. 13 
and 18, March 3, 1899; Dams Nos. 7, 8, 11, and 19, June 13, 1902. 
Only the sum of $23,000 was appropriated by the act of June 13, 
1902, for Dam No. 7, and this amount was expended in acquisition of 
site, preparation of plans, etc., no work of construction being under- 
taken until additional funds were provided by the river and harbor 
act of June 25, 1910. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, providing for a survey 
of the Ohio River between Marietta, Ohio, and the mouth of the 
Big Miami, states that the survey is to be made " with a view to 
the improvement of said river between said points by movable dams 
and otherwise so as to provide 6 feet of water in said river at low 
water, this survey to include a report upon the location of the neces- 
sary dams and the probable cost thereof." As this was in continua- 
tion of the previously authorized project, the locks were given con- 
secutive numberings. Appropriations for their construction were 
made by river and harbor acts as follows: Dam No. 26, March 3, 
1905 ; Dam No. 37, June 13, 1902. Dam No. 37 corresponds with the 
lock to be located near Cullums Ripple, referred to in the joint reso- 
lution of January 10, 1899. (See H. Doc. No. 265, 55th Cong., 3d 
sess.) 

The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, provided for an ex- 
amination at and below pool No. 1 in said river with a view of secur- 
ing increased depth and additional harbor facilities for the city of 
Pittsburgh. A board of officers of the Corps of Engineers ordered 
to consider and report upon this matter was of the opinion that to 



1910 



REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 



meet the demands of traffic a depth of 9 feet should be provided 
from Davis Island (Lock No. 1) to Lock No. 7. (Annual Eeport for 
1903, p. 1693.) The river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, appro- 
priated funds for securing a stage of 9 feet in the pools made by 
Dams Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, and G by a modification of those locks and dams. 
Further appropriations for this purpose were made by sundry civil 
act of June 30, 1906, and river and harbor act of March 2, 1907. 

The river and harbor act approved March 2, 1907, directed that 
Dams Nos. 11, 13, 18, 26, and 37 be so constructed as to provide a 
navigable depth of 9 instead of 6 feet. Increased depth at No. 
19 was not authorized prior to June 25, 1910, when the general proj- 
ect for complete canalization of the river with a view to 9-foot navi- 
gation was adopted. 

With the exception of No. 19, the locks and dams authorized prior 
to the adoption of the general project in 1910 have been completed, 
and were placed under operating and care as follows : 



Dam No. 


Date. 


Dam No. 


Date. 


Dam No. 


Date. 


1 


Oct. 7, 1SS5 
Oct. 13,1906 
Feb. 1, 190S 
do 


5 


Nov. 21,1907 
Aug. 17,1904 
July 14,1911 
Aug. 1,1911 


13 


Aug. l, 1911 


2 


6 


18 


May 1,1910 


3... 


8 


26 


Aug. 1,1912 
Jan. 1, 1911 


4 




11. 




37 











HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECT FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVER IN PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT. 



MONONGAHELA RIVER, W. VA. AND PA. 

The project for the construction of Locks and Dams Nos. 8 and 9 
was adopted February 5, 1872. This project was completed on 
November 8, 1889, with the result that boats drawing 5.2 feet of 
water could navigate the river in low water as far upstream as Mor- 
gantown, W. Va., the river having been previously slack-watered 
from its mouth to Lock No. 8 by the Monongahela Navigation Co. 
The amount expended under this project was $436,900. 

A provision of the river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, authorized 
and directed the Secretary of War to institute and carry to comple- 
tion proceedings for condemnation of all the property and appur- 
tenances of the Monongahela Navigation Co. The property was 
acquired by the United States on July 7, 1897, and includes Locks 
and Dams Nos. 1 to 7, inclusive. The total amount expended was 
$3,769,073.88. 

The act of March 13, 1897, provided for the construction of six locks 
and dams, Nos. 10 to 15, inclusive, between Morgantown and Fair- 
mont. The completion of this project in 1904 extended slack-water 
navigation of the Monongahela River. 28 miles, from Morgantown 
to 4 miles above Fairmont, W. Va.. with a minimum navigable depth 
of 7 feet. The locks have single chambers, 56 feet by 182 feet. The 
amount expended is $1,322,793.80. 

During the years 1883 and 1884 a concerted movement was inaugu- 
rated by the coal operators and dealers in Pittsburgh ami elsewhere 
along the Ohio favoring the purchase of the locks and dams of the 
Monongahela Navigation Co. by the United States and making them 



APPENDIX. 1911 

free of tolls. It was argued, apparently with much reason, that, as 
the Government was then engaged in improving the Kanawha River 
in West Virginia, by means of a system of locks and dams which 
would enable the West Virginia coal from the Kanawha Valley to 
reach the Ohio free of tolls at a point 261 miles nearer the markets of 
the West and South than the mouth of the Monongahela, the Pitts- 
burgh operators would experience great difficulty in competing in 
the future with the West Virginians, hampered as the former were 
with a toll charge on coal amounting, upon an average, to 6J cents 
per ton. 

The river and harbor act of August 5, 1886, authorized the Secre- 
tary of War to appoint a board of three competent engineers from 
the Engineer Corps, United States Army, to ascertain the value 
and commercial importance of the works and property of that com- 
pany in Pennsylvania. 

The report of the board of engineers (H. Ex. Doc. No. 112, 49th 
Cong., 2d sess., and republished in H. Ex. Doc. No. 249, 43d Cong., 
3d sess.) expressed the opinion that the commercial importance of 
the Monongahela was very great and fixed the value of the tangible 
property of the company at $1,950,000. 

The river and harbor act of August 11, 1888, provided for the 
amicable purchase of Lock and Dam No. 7, at a cost not to exceed 
$161,733.13 and further provided that in the event of the inability 
to make voluntary purchase, authorized the Secretary of War to 
institute proceedings for the condemnation of the lock and dam. 

Upon the refusal of the company to sell, condemnation proceed- 
ings were instituted. The case was heard before a board of viewers 
appointed by the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western 
District of Pennsylvania. The value of the work in question was 
fixed by the board at $209,393.52, without reference to the value of 
the franchise. Exception to this verdict was filed by both parties, 
and in November, 1890, the case came up for a final hearing and the 
verdict reached was for $209,000. 

The act of Congress provided that either party might appeal to 
the United States Supreme Court. The navigation company ap- 
pealed the case to that court, which rendered an opinion, given in 
No. 722, October term, 1892, reversing the judgment and granting a 
new trial. 

The river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, provided for con- 
demnation of Lock and Dam No. 6, and appropriated $162,000 for 
this purpose, stipulating that the title to Lock and Dam No. 7 must 
first be secured to the Government before proceedings could be insti- 
tuted for the purchase and condemnation of Lock and Dam No. 6. 

Nothing further was done until the river and harbor act of August 
17, 1894, authorized the Secretary of War to investigate and report 
the sum of money necessary to acquire all the locks and dams, the 
property of the navigation company, and to take testimony as to 
the value of said improvement and the commercial usefulness of said 
river, to the end that Congress might determine as to the expediency 
of making said river free of tolls. 

Upon the recommendation of the Chief of Engineers the Secretary 
of War designated Maj. R. L. Hoxie, Corps of Engineers, to receive 
testimony regarding the value of the property of the Monongahela 
Navigation Co. The report of the Chief of Engineers, embracing 



1912 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

the report of Maj. Hoxie, was submitted to the Secretary of War 
December 12, 1895 (printed as H. Doc. No. 78, 54th Cong., 1st sess.). 
In his report Maj. Hoxie expressed his opinion that the least valua- 
tion through the process of condemnation of the property and fran- 
chise of the Mcnongahela Navigation Co. be s-">.<'>:U.720. 

The final act of- Congress relating to the Monongahela Navigation 
Co., passed June 3, 1896, authorized and directed the Secretary of 
War to institute and carry to completion proceedings for the con- 
demnation of all the company's property and its appurtenances, and 
appropriated $5,000, or as much thereof as might be necessary, to pay 
the necessary cost of said proceedings. In pursuance of this act a 
board of seven viewers was appointed November 27, 1896. by the 
Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Penn- 
sylvania to estimate and determine the value of all the property and 
its appurtenances of the Monongahela Navigation Co. The board 
rendered its report to the court March 25, 1897, awarding damages to 
the navigation company, including the value of all its property and 
its franchise, in the sum of $3,761,615.46. 

No appeal from this award was taken, and final judgment was en- 
tered. A warrant was issued in favor of said companv to the amount 
thereof, less the sum of $160,000 withheld in the United States Treas- 
ury as security for the payment of outstanding bonds of the company. 
On July 7, 1897, the locks and dams and their properties and appur- 
tenances were transferred to the United States and the locks opened 
to free navigation. 

HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE WHEELING, 
W. VA., DISTRICT. 



3. OPERATING AND CARE OF LOCKS AND DAMS ON LITTLE KANAWHA 
RIVER, W. VA. 

The original project, adopted by the river and harbor act approved 
August 14, 1876, provided for removing rocks, snags, and overhang- 
ing trees above Burning Springs, W. Ya. (38 miles above the mouth 
of the river), at a cost of $7,300. 

This project was modified by the act of June 14, 1880. which pro- 
vided for the construction of a lock and dam (No. 5) 2 miles above 
Burning Springs. The original estimated cost (Annual Report for 
1875, pt. 1, p. 740) was $62,000 for a lock of masonry with a wooden 
crib dam. The actual cost was $167,875 for a lock and dam of stone 
and concrete. This lock and dam was opened to navigation on 
December 2, 1891. 

The original project was still further modified by the act of 
March 3, 1905, which provided for the purchase and repair of Locks 
and Dams Nos. 1 to 4, inclusive, owned by the Little Kanawha Navi- 
gation Co., at an estimated cost of $163,000 (H. Doc. No. 309, 58th 
Cong., 2d sess. ; also in Annual Report for 1904, p. 2607, both with- 
out maps). The total cost was as follows: 

Purchase of locks and dams $75, 000. 00 

Repairs and improvements 207, 059. 50 

Total 282, 059. 50 



APPENDIX. 1913 

More extensive repairs than contemplated and necessary improve- 
ments caused the increase over original estimate. 

All projects for the improvement of this river have been com- 
pleted. The total amount appropriated is $496,663.60 (including 
$2.-245.60 received from sales) and the total expenditures are 
$496,663.60. 

4. OPERATING AND CARE OF LOCKS AND DAMS ON KANAWHA 
RIVER, W. VA. 

The original project, adopted by the act approved March 3, 1873, 
provided for removing large bowlders from the channel, excavating 
channels through the shoals, and constructing riprap dams and 
dikes, the object being to increase the depth of water on the shoal 
places, so as to enable towboats to use the stream for a longer period 
each year than its natural condition permitted. The amount ex- 
pended under this project was $50,000. 

This project was modified by the act approved June 12, 1875 
(Annual Report for 1875, pt. 2, pp. 90-98). It provided for obtain- 
ing a depth of 6 feet of Avater all the year round throughout the 
whole river, 97 miles, by the construction of nine locks with movable 
dams from the mouth in the Ohio, at Point Pleasant, W. Va., up to 
Paint Creek, about 79 miles above Point Pleasant, and three locks 
with fixed dams above Paint Creek to Kanawha Falls, the fall of the 
river above Paint Creek being too great to permit of the advan- 
tageous use of movable dams. The estimated cost was $4,071,216. 

The project was modified by reducing the total of movable locks 
and dams from 9 to 8, one of the movable locks and dams originally 
estimated for in the lower portion of the river having been decided, 
after more detailed examination, to be unnecessary (Annual Report 
for 1879, p. 550) ; also, only two of the three fixed dams have been 
constructed — Nos. 2 and 3 — the construction of No. 1 having been 
dispensed with until its necessity shall become more apparent. By 
dropping from the project one fixed and one movable dam, as stated, 
the first estimate was reduced by about $600,000. However, after 
appropriations had been made amounting to $2,579,500, a revised 
estimate was made in 1892 (Annual Report for 1892, pp. 2042-2044) 
showing that $1,305,700 still remained to be supplied by Congress 
in order to complete the project. This amount was appropriated by 
the acts of July 13, 1892, March 3, 1893, and March 2, 1895. The 
estimate of 1892 was made, however, before the exact site of Lock 
and Dam No. 11 had been selected, before a thorough knowledge of 
the amount of dredging between locks was available, and before the 
passage of the law limiting a day's work of a Government employee 
to eight hours. A second revised estimate was therefore found neces- 
sary in 1896, and the increased amount of it, $273,000, was appro- 
priated in the sundry civil act of June 4, 1897. (Annual Report for 
1897, p. 2569.) 

With all modifications, the project provided for eight locks with 
movable dams and two locks with fixed dams, so as to provide a 
6-foot navigable depth, at a total cost of $4,158,200. 

All projects for the improvement of this river have been com- 
pleted. 



1914 EEPOET OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

Total appropriated $4, 29G, 949. 45 

Carried to surplus fund •_ 2,337.20 

4, 294, G12. 25 
Received from sales 3,429.68 

Total amount expended 4, 298, 041. 93 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE LOUISVILLE, 
KY., DISTRICT. 



1. FALLS OF OHIO RIVER AT LOUISVILLE, KY.— LOUISVILLE & PORT- 
LAND CANAL— LOCK AND DAM NO. 41, OHIO RIVER. 

The obstructions in the Ohio Kiver, known as the Falls of the 
Ohio, are formed by an irregular mass of limestone underlying the 
bed of the river opposite Louisville, Ky. This mass of rock forms a 
natural dam, producing a deep pool above and, in low-water stages, 
a fall of 27 feet from the head to the foot of the falls. In their 
natural condition these falls were impassable during the larger por- 
tion of the year, and at other times, except when the river was very 
high, navigation over them was difficult and dangerous. There were 
three natural channels over these obstructions, known as Indiana, 
Middle, and Kentucky Chutes. The former was the main and the 
longest channel. 

The projects for the improvement of navigation at this locality 
have had for their object the construction and maintenance of a 
canal with locks around the obstructions, the improvement of the 
natural channels through the obstructions, and increasing depth of 
water and controlling its flow by means of dams. 

OLD CANAL. 

In 1825 the Legislature of Kentucky granted a charter to the Louis- 
ville & Portland Canal Co., authorizing it to construct a canal around 
the Falls of the Ohio within the State of Kentucky, and among other 
things prescribed certain rates of toll for its use. Subsequent acts by 
the same body in 1829 and 1831 extended the time for the comple- 
tion of the canal and increased the capital stock of the company, 
which finally reached $1,000,000. Under acts of Congress of Mav 13, 
1826, and March 2, 1829, the Government purchased 2,335 shares of 
the 10,000 shares of the company, paying therefor $233,500. 

The canal as originally constructed by the company was 1.9 miles 
long and 64 feet wide, with three locks in series at the foot of the canal, 
each with a lift of 8 feet 5£ inches, a width of 50 feet, and a length 
of about 200 feet. The first boat passed through the canal December 
22, 1830. 

The cost of the original canal, including the land, was $1,019,277.09. 
During the period 1831-1841 tolls to the amount of $1,025,345.45 were 
collected, and during the period 1834-1842 cash dividends to the 
amount of $822,539 were paid, of which the Government received 
$257,778 in addition to 567 shares of stock in lieu of dividends. 



APPENDIX. 1915 

In 1842, with a view to eventually freeing the canal of tolls, the 
canal company's charter was amended, authorizing the appropriation 
of its net income to the purchase of the stock of the company held by 
individuals, the stock so purchased to be held in trust until all the 
outstanding shares held in the name of others than the Government 
should be purchased, when all the shares were to be transferred to the 
Government on condition that the Government would levy only suffi- 
cient tolls to keep the canal in repair, pay necessary expenses, make 
necessary improvements, etc. During the period 1843-1854, 7,093 
shares of stock were purchased by the company at a cost of $1,419,062. 
At the end of this period 5 shares were held by the directors individu- 
ally, 7,093 by directors in trust for the United States, and 2,902 by the 
United States. 

In 1844 an act was passed by the Kentucky Legislature providing 
that in the event of the United States becoming the sole owner of the 
canal the canal should be yielded up to the Government. 

NEW CANAL. 

In 1857, the canal proving to be inadequate to the needs of naviga- 
tion, and the United States having failed to assume control, the com- 
pany's charter was amended so as to authorize it to construct a branch 
canal and enlarge the old one with the revenues and on the credit of 
the corporation. Congress, by act of May 24, 1860, ratified the action 
of the Kentucky Legislature in amending the company's charter with 
the proviso that the officers of the company should in no way use or 
pledge the faith or credit of the United States, and that when the 
enlargement was completed and paid for no more tolls should be col- 
lected than an amount sufficient to keep the canal in repair and pay 
necessary expenses, etc. 

Plans for the enlargement were adopted which consisted in widen- 
ing the canal prism from 64 to 100 feet (subsequently reduced to 85 
feet) , and lining both sides with a vertical wall 17 feet high ; in fixing 
the depth of water in the canal at the lowest stage at 6 feet ; in remov- 
ing the abrupt angle in the canal and substituting a regular, easy 
curve; in providing three passing places; in constructing a guard 
gate at the head ; in constructing a dam or crib protection of timber 
and stone, about 600 feet long, extending eastwardly from the head 
of the canal, and removing all projecting points of rocks inside of it ; 
in providing a floating boom at the head of the canal to exclude ice 
and drift; the new locks to be placed 1,500 feet below the old locks, 
and be connected with the old canal by a branch 2,600 feet long, the 
locks to be two combined, each with a lift of 13 feet, and the rocks 
at the foot of the canal to be removed to open a wide and safe channel. 

Work was begun on the enlargement in 1860, but the corporation, 
after expending about $1,825,403, was compelled to suspend opera- 
tions in 1866, through lack of funds. 

Congress, by act of July 25, 1868, provided for the completion of 
the canal in accordance with the then adopted plans, and assumed 
the payment of the canal bonds, on condition that all title and right 
in the canal should be ceded and vested in the United States. Under 
this act and subsequent appropriation acts the work was completed by 
the United States practically as originally designed, and provided a 
depth of 6 feet in the canai by means of excavation and a guiding 



1916 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

dike and cross dam at the head of the canal; a width of 86| feet be- 
tween vertical walls 15 to 17 feet high; two locks in series, each 372 
feet between quoins, or 348 feet available length, 80 feet wide, with 
13^ feet lift. The new locks were opened to navigation February 
26, 1872. The cross dam raised the pool about 3 feet. 

The Kentuckj' Legislature, by a joint resolution approved March 
28, 1872, directed the transfer of the canal and property to the United 
States under certain conditions. The act of Congress of March 5, 
1873, provided for the assumption of the control and management 
of the canal by the United States in conformity with the last-named 
resolution. The act of May 11, 1874, provided for the payment of 
the debts of the canal company, purchase of stock held by the di- 
rectors, etc., and for taking possession of the property, and provided 
that the canal should be held " free of all tolls and charges except 
such as are necessary to pay current expenses of said canal, and keep 
the same in repair." The act of May 18, 1880, directed that " no 
tolls shall be charged or collected at the Louisville & Portland Canal." 

The United States assumed charge of the work of enlargement 
following an allotment from the act of July 25, 1868, but the opera- 
tion of the canal and collection of tolls remained under the control 
of the corporate management until June 11, 1874, upon which date 
the entire control of the canal was taken over by the United States 
pursuant to the act of May 11, 1874. 

Tolls were abolished after midnight July 1, 1880, since which 
date the expenses of operation and maintenance of the canal have 
been borne by United States Treasury funds made available by 
the river and harbor acts of March 3, 1881, July 5, 1884, and March 
3, 1909. 

COST OF NEW CANAL. 

Old canal, private corporation $1, 019, 277 

Improvements, private corporation (about) 120,000 

Total cost of old canal 1, 139, 277 

Enlargement, private corporation 1, S2.~>, 403 

Enlargement, canal tolls collected and expended by the Govern- 
ment (about) 150, 000 

Enlargement, Government funds (completion of new locks, enlarge- 
ment of canal, cross dam at bead of canal, payment of bonds, etc.) : 

Act July 25, 1868, allotment $85. 000 

Act Apr. 10, 1869, allotment 178,200 

Act July 11, 1870, appropriation 250,000 

Act Jan. 18, 1871, appropriation 200,000 

Act Mar. 3, 1871, appropriation 250, 000 

Act June 10, 1872, appropriation 300, 000 

Act Mar. 3, 1S73, appropriation 100, 000 

Act Mar. 3, 1875, appropriation 100, 000 

1,463.200 

Total cost of canal (including locks and appurtenances) 4, 577. SS0 

Cost to Government, original stock purchase 233. 500 

Cost to Government, enlargement 1, 463, 200 

Canal enlargement bonds assumed 1, 172, 000 

Total expenditure 2. 868. 700 

Deduct cash dividends received 2r»T. 77S 

Total cost to Government 2, 610, 922 



APPENDIX. 1917 

Practically all of the historical data given above has been extracted 
from the special report of Maj. G. Weitzel, Corps of Engineers, 
dated February 10, 1882. This report may be found in the Annual 
Eeport of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year ending June 30, 
1882, pages 1880-1902, and in Senate Executive Document No. 129, 
Forty-seventh Congress, first session. 

There was included in the report referred to the following list 
of " additional works necessary at the falls of the Ohio River to 
complete the improvements thereof in a manner to serve the inter- 
ests of the commerce of said river." 

(a) About 1,300 feet in length additional of the permanent dam, as designed 
and partially constructed across the Ohio River on the crest of the falls, should 
be converted into movable dams. 

( b ) The entrance to the head of the canal should be very much enlarged. 

(c) Additional canal accommodations around or over these obstructions 
should be provided. 

(d) That portion of the north bank of the existing canal which has thus far 
been untouched by the work of enlargement should be rectified and new side 
walls built. 

(e) A set of gates should be provided in the branch canal just above the 
new locks for high-water lockage. 

(/) A new lock should be built with a chamber as wide as the present new 
locks. 

(g) A new dry dock should be constructed. 

(h) The basin above the head of the present lock should be enlarged. 

ENLARGEMENTS. 

Previous to 1883 the approach to the canal at its upper end, above 
the Louisville Bridge Co.'s bridge at Fourteenth Street, was so nar- 
row as to constitute a source of much expensive delay to the large 
quantity of traffic which came down the river on ordinary rises. 
The canal proper from Ninth to Fourteenth Streets was only 100 
feet wide and curved between the two points, so that progress was 
slow and accidents frequent and unavoidable. The greater part of 
the dike marking the north side of the approach to the canal was 
submerged when the river reached a stage of 8.4 feet, upper canal 
gauge, and at stages of 9 feet or more a strong current set out from 
the shore, thus carrying many vessels against the dike and, at high 
enough stages, over it onto the rock ledges. This approach was 1,800 
feet long and varied in width from 400 feet at the upper end to 100 
feet opposite Ninth Street. Its area was wholly insufficient for the 
required breaking and rearrangement of tows preparatory to enter- 
ing or leaving the canal. 

Enlargements at the head of the canal. — The first project for addi- 
tional improvements at the Falls of the Ohio, printed in the Annual 
Report of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year ending June 
30, 1883, page 1539, was adopted by the act of July 5, 1884, and con- 
templated — 

enlarging the present canal by moving its northern wall to the northern line 
of the canal property, commencing at the pivot pier of the railroad bridge and 
extending eastwardly to the eastern boundary line of the property of the Louis- 
ville Cement Co. At this point will be the new head of the canal, and it will be 
connected with the existing dam on the crest of the falls by a similar dam 
along the eastern line of the cement company's property to its northeastern 
corner, thence by a straight line to the southern end of the opening for the 
Middle Chute. 



1918 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, TJ. S. ARMY. 

This project proposed the enlargement of the canal, beginning at a 
point a short distance below the railroad bridge at Fourteenth Street 
and extending eastwardly to the cross dam, so as to not only 
straighten and widen the canal proper, but also provide ample space 
for the necessary rearrangement of tows about to enter or leave the 
canal. This was slightly modified in 1885, so far as the location of 
the new north wall was concerned. A revision of the project was 
made by a board of engineer officers January 28, 1890, and approved 
by the Chief of Engineers January 31, 1890. This revision modified 
the area formerly proposed to be excavated and determined the num- 
ber and kind of structures, etc., to be erected. As approved, it pro- 
vided for enlarging the canal on its northerly side from a point 725 
feet below the railroad bridge at Fourteenth Street, where the width 
of the canal was abruptly increased from 90 feet to 210 feet. This 
latter width is then gradually increased through a distance of nearly 
2,800 feet to 325 feet at the head of the canal proper, at which point 
the enlargement is expanded into a capacious basin or harbor 1.200 
feet wide and practically parallel to the Kentucky shore. The struc- 
tures proposed were a new retaining wall on the north side of the 
canal, a movable dam about 800 feet long, a fixed dam extending from 
the movable dam at the westerly end of the basin to the south abut- 
ment of the movable dam in the Middle Chute opening of the cross 
dam, the excavation of rock within designated limits to the same 
grade as the canal bottom, the construction of certain walls and slope 
revetment on the south side of the canal, and the removal of the old 
structures within the limits of the proposed enlargement. Under 
date of March 31, 1899, a further modification of some of the details 
of the project was considered by a board of engineer officers and their 
recommendations approved by the Chief of Engineers April 8. L899. 
These later modifications, together with the work outlined in the 
report, were approved January 31, 1890. The totals of estimates 
under the original project and the several revisions are as follows: 

Project of 1S83, page 1539, Annual Report of the Chief of Engi- 
neers for 1883 $1, 335, 3G3. 00 

Revision approved Jan. 31, 1S90, page 2217, Annual Report of the 

Chief of Engineers for 1890 710, 280. 40 

Modification approved Apr. 8, 1899, page 2562, Annual Report of 

the Chief of Engineers for 1899 300. 391. 92 

A revision of the latter estimate was made Nov. 13, 1900, approved 

by the Chief of Engineers Nov. 17, 1900, and amounted to 398. 3."i9. 12 

The foregoing relates particularly to the improvements at the head 
of the Louisville & Portland Canal. 

Enlargement of basin above locks. — By the act of August 5, 1886, 
the project for the enlargement of the upper portion of the canal was 
made to include the enlargement of the basin of the canal just ;il><>ve 
the locks, as recommended in the "last report of the engineer in 
charge." (Annual Report for 1885. p. 1804.) This work consisted 
in widening that part of the canal which extends from the new locks 
to the basin above, a distance of about 800 feet, from 90 feet to -215 
feet. The work was estimated to cost $120,000. It was begun in 
1887 and completed in 1893. 



APPENDIX. 1919 

IMPROVEMENTS TO NAVIGATION OVER THE FALLS. 

Originally there were three natural channels over the falls, known 
as the Indiana, Middle, and Kentucky Chutes. The former was the 
main channel and ran near the Indiana shore, between it and Goose 
Island, making a large bend near the foot of the fall, called the Big 
Eddy. It was 2§ miles long. At extreme low stages about one-half 
of its total fall, 13 feet, occurred in the first tV mile and about 
two-thirds of its fall, 17^ feet, occurred in the first 1\ miles. 
When the water rose 7 feet at the crest of the falls above extreme low 
water it rose about 18^ feet at the foot of the channel, the difference 
in level between the two pools being about 13^ feet. The Middle 
Chute began about the middle of the river and passed down between 
Goose and Rock Islands. The length of this channel was 2£ miles, 
and about 22 feet, or almost the entire fall, was in the last 500 yards. 
The Kentucky Chute lay nearer to the Kentucky shore and passed 
down between it and Rock Island. Almost the entire fall was in the 
last 185 yards. (Annual Report for 1882, p. 1881.) 

Indiana Chute. — All of the work for the improvement of naviga- 
tion over the falls has been devoted to widening and deepening the 
Indiana Chute Channel and controlling the flow through it by means 
of a dam at the head of the canal and the construction of dikes along 
its course. This channel was originally very crooked and filled with 
dangerous rocky points. 

A dam from the Indiana shore to the head of Sand Island was com- 
pleted in 1872, but subsequently abandoned. In 1879 some of the 
worst obstructions in the channel were removed. Between 1880 and 
1890 much work, consisting in the removal of some of the more dan- 
gerous rock ledges, was accomplished under estimates and allotments 
for improving Ohio River. 

Prior to January 31, 1890, there was no specific comprehensive 
project for the systematic improvement of the Indiana Chute Chan- 
nel. On that date the project submitted by a board of engineer 
officers for the radical improvement of this chute was approved by 
the Chief of Engineers. This project had for its object the widening 
and deepening of the channel by rock excavation to specified grades 
within certain limits and the control of water flow in the channel by 
means of dikes, etc., so as to make this channel available for descend- 
ing navigation drawing 6| feet at stages of 8 feet, upper canal gauge. 
However, only a part of the work necessary for the purpose in view 
was included in the estimate accompanying the report of the board, it 
being stated: 

As the exact knowledge of the results of that work [i. e., the work estimated 
for in the board's report] would be of great importance in fixing the details of 
location and cross section of the additional works that will be required, it would 
be as well to leave the determination of the additional work above the bridge 
to a later day. 

The estimates for work on this chute since the adoption of a specific 
project therefor are as follows: 

Project approved Jan. 31, 1890 $138, 610. 97 

Modification approved Apr. 8, 1899 74, 320. 98 

Revision of estimate approved by the Chief of Engineers Nov. 17, 
1900 129, 651. 99 



1920 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, TJ. S. ARMY. 

A consolidation of the projects for the enlargement at the head of 
the canal and the improvement of the Indiana Chute was authorized 
by the Chief of Engineers June 28, 1897, and since that date funds 
were provided for work at both localities under one title of appro- 
priation. 

Work under that part of the project relating to the Indiana Chute 
having been completed, a board of Engineer officers was assembled to 
determine, as anticipated in the project of 1890, what further work 
was essential to provide the requisite depth necessary^ to facilitate the 
passage of traffic through this channel. The report of the board was 
submitted December 16, 1901, and approved by the Chief of Engi- 
neers December 30, 1901. The items of additional work found to be 
necessary to produce the desired result and the estimated cost thereof 
are as follows: 

Submerged dam at Whirlpool Point (large stone), 2,500 cubic yards, 

at $3 $7. 500 

Raising movable dam north of canal wall 2. 500 

Removing old dam and building movable dam, 1,000 feet, at $75 75. 000 

Longitudinal contracting dikes (concrete), 22.300 cubic yards, at $12 207. 800 

Submerged dams below bridge (concrete). 3.000 cubic yards, at $20 60. 000 

Rock excavation, 3,200 cubic yards, at $3.50 11. 200 

Contingencies, 10 per cent 42,380 

Total 4GG, ISO 

For this latter work the board prescribed the order in which it 
should be done, and stated that it was possible that a part of the work 
might become unnecessary if certain results were produced by the 
submerged dam at Whirlpool Point, and in that event about $125,000 
would probabty be saved from the estimated cost. 

NEW PROJECT FOR ENLARGEMENT OF THE CANAL, RECONSTRUCTION OF 
DAMS, ETC. 

In House Document No. 492, Sixtieth Congress, first session, the 
Ohio Eiver board recommended the omission of all of the foregoing 
items except that for removing the old dam and building a movable 
dam at the head of the falls (No. 41 of the series), and in lieu of 
such omitted items proposed the following to increase the facilities 
for passing the falls : 

(1) To widen the narrow portion of the canal to 170 feet, thus permitting the 
passage of a downbound tow of loaded coal boats and an upbonnd tow of empty 
coal boats, each tow three abreast; (2) to construct a new single-lift concrete 
lock south of and by the side of the present lock, available dimensions of the 
chamber to be 85 feet by 600 feet, thus permitting the passage at one lockage of 
9 coal boats or 12 coal barges; (3) to create a pool above the falls, with eleva- 
tion of pool surface at 412.004 (9 feet on upper canal gauge), by the replacing 
of the wooden dam between Middle and Indiana Chutes by a P.oule Dam. with 
crest at 412.004, which work is already provided for and under way. and by 
the construction of the sections of dam recommended by the district engineer 
officer in the project approved by the Chief of Engineers on December 28, L908, 
with crests at 412.004 instead of 411.004. recommended therein, this height of 
crest being desirable for either a 6-foot or a 9-foot slack-water navigation, or 
even if the river is not further improved by the slack-water method: (4) to 
remove the rock necessary to complete the widening of the basin at the head 
of the canal contemplated by the present approved project; (51 to reconstruct 
the three sections of Boule Dam just north of the head of canal with crest at 
415.704, instead of crest at 412.504. as provided for in present project, thus 
eliminating the cross current across the head of the canal, which current now 



APPENDIX. 1921 

makes it very difficult for tows to enter the canal at stages between 8 and 
12.7 feet. It is proposed to leave the crest of the present fixed concrete dam at 
411.004 to serve as a fixed weir for the low-water discharge of the river. 

All elevations are in feet above mean tide at Sandy Hook, N. J. 
The estimated cost of the work proposed by this board is as 
follows : 

Widening canal to 170 feet, etc $673, 000 

New locks and appurtenances 773, 000 

New dams 240, 000 

Reconstructing Boule Dam at head of canal 31, 000 

Removal of rock in basin 43, 000 

Total 1, 760, 000 

The river and harbor act of June 25, 1910, adopted a canalization 
project for the entire river, in accordance with report printed in 
House Document No. 492, Sixtieth Congress, first session, or such 
modifications thereof as, in the discretion of the Secretary of War, 
might be advisable. This project includes the canal widening and 
new lock (items 1 and 2 of above estimate). 

In order that Lock and Dam No. 41 might be of the same dimen- 
sions as the other locks and dams on the Ohio River, and in order 
that future navigation might be adequately provided for, the Secre- 
tary of War, under date of March 24, 1911, exercised the authority 
granted him by the act of June 25, 1910, and approved a modification 
of the approved project by increasing the canal prism from 170 feet 
to 200 feet, and by increasing the width of the new lock (No. 41 
of the series) from 85 feet to 110 feet, at an increase in cost of 
$431,500. 

EXISTING PROJECT. 

As now approved the existing project proposes: (1) To widen the 
narrow portion of the canal to 200 feet; (2) construct a new single- 
lift concrete lock south of and by the side of the present lock, avail- 
able dimensions of new lock to be 110 feet by 600 feet; (3) remove 
certain rock from basin at head of canal; and (4) create a pool 
above the falls, with elevation of pool surface at 412.004 (9 feet on 
upper canal gauge), by the reconstruction of old sections and build- 
ing new sections of dam where none previously existed. 

The estimate for this work is itemized as follows : 

Widening the canal to 200 feet, etc $936, 031 

New lock and appurtenances 1, 710, 325 

New dams and reconstructing Boule Dam at head of canal 271, 000 

Removal of rock in basin 43, 000 

Total 2, 960, 356 

The act of March 2, 1907, provided for the completion of the third 
and fourth items. This work has been done, leaving only the first 
and second items as the remainder of the existing project to be com- 
pleted, for which the estimate amounts to $2,646,356. 

PRESENT CONDITIONS. 

All of the projected works of navigation at the Falls of the Ohio 
were finally completed in 1911, except the widening of the canal to 
8373°— eng 1915 121 



1922 EEPOET OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

200 feet and the construction of a new lock, etc., now included in the 
canalization project for the entire river. 

The successive improvements at this locality have resulted in the 
completion of the following works : 

Louisville & Portland Canal. — Length, including locks and lower 
entrance, 2^ miles; width, at Louisville Harbor, 800 feet; upper en- 
trance to canal, 400 feet, reducing to 200 feet; throughout the canaL 
86| feet; at the basin above the locks, 215 feet; minimum deptli of 
water in the canal, 9 feet. 

Locks. — These locks, two in series, are 372 feet long between quoins, 
with available length of 348 feet, and are 80 feet wide, and have 
wooden mitering gates. The locks have a maximum lift of 34 feet, 
divided between the two. 

Plant. — This includes office buildings, superintendent's dwelling, 
warehouses, stable, shops for the repair of operating machinery, dam 
trestles, wickets, boats, etc., 2 towboats, 2 maneuver boats, 2 dredges, 
and auxiliary craft. 

Dam. — This is 5,247 feet long, and extends across the river at the 
head of the canal. It is part mason^, part concrete, and part mov- 
able. When in operation it gives at all times a depth of 9 feet in the 
harbor and canal and provides that depth upstream for 50 miles to 
Madison, Ind. 

Indiana Chute Channel. — This channel over the falls is about 400 
feet wide and can now be navigated with ease by heavy-draft coal 
boats at stages of 11.5 feet or more, upper canal gauge. 

RESULTS OF THE PRESENT IMPROVEMENT. 

Navigation past the Falls of the Ohio at all stages of the river has 
been made possible to boats drawing 8 feet or less. The canal is 
available to commerce at all stages of the river less than 12.7 feet, 
upper canal gauge, and affords free navigation around the falls at all 
stages of water when the passage can not be made by the river chan- 
nel. The zero of the upper canal gauge is 403.004 feet above mean 
tide at Sandy Hook, N. J. 

COST OF THE COMPLETED IMPROVEMENTS. 

Cost to the United States of the "new canal," as originally com- 
pleted ___ $2. 610. 022. 00 

Expenditures for subsequent improvements : 

Expended from allotments, 1881, to Jan. 31. 1S90 110,040.80 

Expended under project of 1883, for enlargement of head of 

canal, to Jan. 31, 1890 347, 3S0. 68 

Reserved, Office Chief of Engineers, United States Army 1, ST 1. 20 

Expended under project for enlarging canal basin at locks__ 133, 000. 00 
Expended under revised project of Jan. 31, 1800, 
to June 30, 1S07— 

On enlargement at head of canal $20S,S56. 35 

On Indiana Chute Channel 103,602.81 

402. 4.-0. 16 

Expended under appropriations for enlargement at head of 
canal and Indiana Chute, in accordance with project of 

Jan. 31, 1800. to Mar. 31, 1809 208,650.75 

Expended under appropriations for enlargement at head of 
canal and Indiana Chute, in accordance with the modified 
project of Mar. 31, 1S00 (approved Apr. S, 1800) 450,075. 27 



. OF ENGINEERS. U. S. 



hi 




FALLS OF THE OHIO RIVER 

SURVEYED 1343 
BY T J CRAM. CAPT. T. E. 



SCALE IN FEET 



House Doc. No. ?/ ; 64th Cong., 1st Sess. 




BEFORE IMPROVEMENT. 



House Doc. No. 9 ' >' 64th Cong., 1st Sess. 



CORPS OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY 



alls of Ohio River 

THEIR IMPROVEMENTS. 










R 




House Doc. No. (j I ; 64th Cong., 1st Sess. 



WAR DEPARTMENT 




FIGURE 2. CONDITION 1867. 



House Doc. No. q I ; 64th Cong., 1st Sess. 



- 

- 



FLINE SI 

OF 

iand Canal 

LOSE OF FIS< 

1878. 







■ 




WAR DEPARTMENT 



CORPS OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY 




FIGURE 3. CONDITION 1878. 



CORPS OF ENGINEERS. U S. ARMY 





OHIO RIVER 
Lock and dam no. 41. 



SCALE IN FEET. 



250 500 1000 aooo 

11 1 t 1 



JESENT CONDITION. qi ; 64th Cong., 1st Sess. 




^ 



4 



FIGURE 4. PRESENT CONDITION. 



OHIO RIVER 

LOCK AND DAM No. 41. 



House Doc. No. <jl ; 64th Cong., 1st Sess. 



APPENDIX. 1923 

Expenditures for subsequent improvements — Continued. 

Expended under the project recommended by the Ohio River 
Board, as modified by the Secretary of War, exclusive of 
the amounts expended for widening the canal and build- 
ing a new lock under the present Ohio River canalization 
project $313, 650. 00 

Total cost to the United States 4, 593, 070. 86 

Expended by private company 1, 966, S58. 00 

Total cost of improvements 6, 559, 928. 86 

In addition to the foregoing, there has been expended to June 30, 
1915, on the work of widening the canal to 200 feet and building the 
new lock, etc., the sum of $1,275,229.28, making the total cost of all 
new work at this locality $7,835,158.14, of which the United States 
expended $5,868,300.14. 

References to more extended information concerning original con- 
dition, purchase, and progress of the improvement of this canal are 
given on page 491, Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1904. 

Reports upon examinations and surveys may be found as follows: 

Report of W. D. Gallagher, special agent, "Treasury Department, 
September 30, 1867, concerning interest of the United States in the 
Louisville & Portland Canal, legislation, financial affairs, condition 
of work, etc. (H. Misc. Doc. No. 83, 40th Cong., 2d sess.) 

Report of the House Committee on Railways and Canals, recom- 
mending that the Louisville & Portland Canal be made free from toll. 
(H. Kept. No. 348, 46th Cong., 2d sess.) 

Special report made in response to resolution of the Senate of the 
United States calling for information as to " what, if any, addi- 
tional works are necessary at the Falls of the Ohio River to complete 
the improvement thereof in a manner to serve the interests of the 
commerce of the Ohio River," etc. (Annual Report Chief of Engi- 
neers for 1882, p. 1880.) This report briefly describes original condi- 
tion, the construction of the canal by the stock company, conditions 
at the time the United States assumed charge of the improvement of 
the canal, discusses additional works deemed necessary, and gives 
estimates of cost. The report, accompanied by the maps referred to 
in it, may also be found in Senate Executive Document No. 129, 
Forty-seventh Congress, first session. 

Report on drainage rights, Louisville & Portland Canal, accom- 
panied by map showing location of sewers emptying into the canal. 
(H. Ex. Doc. No. 51, 49th Cong., 2d sess.) The report with map 
omitted may also be found on page 1852, Annual Report Chief of 
Engineers for 1887. 

Report as to whether or not the Government dry dock at the Louis- 
ville & Portland Canal is adequate for the purposes of commerce, and 
what alterations, if any, are necessary, and the cost of making same. 
(Pp. 1896-1901, Annual Report Chief of Engineers for 1887.) 

2. WABASH RIVER, IND. AND ILL., LOCK AND DAM AT GRAND RAPIDS, 
WABASH RIVER. 

At the time the United States began the work of improving this 
river it was badly obstructed by bars, accumulations of snags, rocky 
reefs, and numerous secondary channels or cut-offs, which lessened 



1924 EEPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. AEMY. 

the flow of water through the main channel. Navigation was im- 
practicable except at high stages of water. A lock and dam had been 
built at Grand Rapids by the Wabash Navigation Co. and a few im- 
provements made at other places, also by private enterprise; but as 
none of them was of a substantial character, they rapidly deteriorated 
and became useless. 

The original project and outline of improvements proposed is 
found in the report of Maj. G. Weitzel, Corps of Engineers, January 
4, 1872, page 472, Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1872. 
The first appropriation for work under this project was made by 
Congress June 10, 1872. This project proposed the improvement of 
the river from its mouth to Lafayette, Ind., by special works at 12 
designated localities, the construction of a new lock and dam at 
Grand Rapids, and the general work of snagging and dredging. The 
estimated cost of the work proposed amounted to $312,672.62. Work 
at various places other than those mentioned in the project was 
added from time to time, but no general revision of the original esti- 
mate was made. 

The river and harbor act of March 3. 1881. made separate appro- 
priations for work above Vincennes and for work below Vincennes, 
thus dividing the original project, and subsequent to that date funds 
have been provided separately for each section. 

From the commencement of the work, in 1872, to March 31, 1881, 
the expenditures, all of which were for work below Vincennes, 
amounted to $324,845.44. Those for work since that date are given 
under their respective headings, as follows: 

(a) Below Vincennes. — Subsequent to 1881 work was continued 
under the original project, but the estimates were modified from time 
to time as necessity therefor arose, as in the cases for the dam for 
closing the New Harmony Cut-off, the lock and dam at Grand 
Rapids, etc. Levee work at Grayville, 111., was added in 1887. and 
completed, as proposed, at a cost of $25,000. In 1898 a plan and esti- 
mate amounting to $50,000, for additional work at New Harmony 
was approved, but at the same time it was urged that if the improve- 
ment of the river was to be continued the old project should be abro- 
gated, a comprehensive survey of the river made, and a new project 
formulated, based upon data furnished by the survey and of sufficient 
scope to meet existing needs of commerce. The survey was author- 
ized and funds therefor provided by the river and harbor act of June 
13, 1902. The report on the survey, proposed plan for improvement, 
estimate of cost, and action taken in connection therewith may be 
found on page 2729, Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 
1904. The aggregate of the items of the original estimate applicable 
to this part of the river and of the several subsequent estimates con- 
stituting the estimate of cost of existing project adopted bv Con- 
gress is $755,000. 

The expenditures to March 31, 1881. amounted to $317,845.44, in 
addition to the $7,000 paid to extinguish the franchise of the Wabash 
Navigation Co. and acquire their propertv. those for the levee work 
at Grayville from 1887 to 1892. $25,000, and those for other work 
since 1881 on this part of the river, $365,111.76, or an aggregate of 
$714,957.20 for work below Vincennes to June 30, 1909. 



APPENDIX. 1925 

Previous to 1885 a fairly good channel for boats having a draft not 
exceeding 2^ to 3 feet was maintained, but as the river and harbor act 
of July 5, 1884, made specific appropriation for a lock and dam at 
Grand Eapids, near Mount Carmel, 111., the suspension of operations 
elsewhere became necessary, in view of the fact that the funds avail- 
able since that date were not sufficient to complete the lock and dam, 
and at the same time maintain the former works for bank protection 
and to concentrate the water flow and clear the channel of obstruc- 
tions. Consequently the work formerly done deteriorated rapidly, 
the structures being destroyed by ice and high water or rendered 
useless by the water cutting its way around them. The channels, 
cut through rock reefs and shoal places, became choked with snags, 
stumps, and bowlders, thus leaving the river without any permanent 
improvement excepting that resulting from the lock and dam at 
Grand Eapids. Through navigation at low water is impracticable. 
Boats drawing 20 inches can pass from Mount Carmel to Vincennes 
(a river distance of about 34 miles) at all stages, but can reach Mount 
Carmel, 92.7 miles from the mouth of the river, only when the gauge 
at the lock reads 7.5 feet or more. 

(b) Above Vincennes. — At the time this section of the river became 
the object of separate appropriations there had been no revision of 
the estimate in the original project for the improvement of the river 
from its mouth to Lafayette. Under the project matured after the 
appropriation had been made (see Annual Report of the Chief of 
Engineers for 1881, p. 2001), and subsequent modifications, the esti- 
mates to June 30, 1908, amounted to $95,500. 

The expenditures on the work of the last project to June 30, 1909, 
amounted to $95,254.87. 

The funds available since 1893 were not sufficient to maintain the 
former works for channel rectification and to keep the river clear of 
snags, bars, and similar obstructions, and during the more recent years 
funds available were insufficient for snagging purposes alone. There- 
fore it can not be said that any permanent improvement of this sec- 
tion of the river has been effected or that navigation is practicable, 
except at high stages of water. 

There is at present no approved comprehensive project in force 
for the improvement of Wabash Eiver. On June 30, 1909, the un- 
expended balances of the appropriations were carried to the surplus 
fund of the Treasury, and no funds for this purpose have since been 
provided. (Annual Eeport for 1909, pp. 652 and 655.) 

LOCK AND DAM AT GRAND RAPIDS, WABASH RIVER. 

This lock has been under operation since 1893. It is located 97 
miles above the mouth of the river. Slack water extends only about 
12 miles above the lock. The dam is unusually long for a small 
stream. 

Expenditures. — The total expenditure by the Government for im- 
proving Wabash Eiver is as follows : 

Below Vincennes $714, 957. 20 

Above Vincennes 95, 254. 87 



810, 212. 07 



1926 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEEBS, U. S. ARMY. 

References to more extended information are given on pages 494 
to 496, Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year 
ending June 30, 1904. 

3. GREEN AND BARREN RIVERS, KY. 

Green and Barren Rivers lie wholly within the State of Kentucky, 
and, with their tributaries, drain an area of about 10,000 square miles. 
About 1835 the State of Kentucky undertook the improvement of 
these rivers by locks and dams. Six locks and dams in Green Rive* 
and one in Barren River were placed under contract, but of these 
only four in Green and one in Barren River were completed. The 
slack-water system as completed by the State was opened to navi 
gation in 1841. The first lock and dam on Green River was placed 
at Spottsville, 8^ miles from the Ohio; the second at Rumsey. 51$ 
miles from the first; the third at Rochester, 43£ miles from the 
second ; and the fourth at Woodbury, 41| miles from the third. The 
lock in Barren River was placed at Green Castle, 15 miles from Lock 
No. 4, Green River. These five locks and dams, together with the 
backwater from the Ohio, gave continuous navigation for a < I raft 
of 4 feet from the Ohio River to Bowling Green, a distance of 175 
miles. They were operated by the State until 1868. 

In 1868 an act of the Kentucky Legislature granted a charter to 
the Green & Barren River Navigation Co., transferring to that com- 
pany the control of the Green and Barren improvements for a period 
of 30 years. This act, which was subsequently amended in 1876 and 
1878, regulated rates of toll for passage through the locks. The 
tolls for a boat of 150 tons, whether loaded or light, amounted to 
about $360 for a trip from the mouth of Green River to Bowling 
Green and return. Passenger charges on the company's boats 
amounted to from 3 to 10 cents per mile, according to the distance 
traveled. (Annual Report for 1885, p. 1905.) 

In 1886 an act of the Kentucky Legislature ceded the entire system 
to the United States, upon condition that the unexpired portion of 
the lease to the navigation company be purchased by the L T nited 
States. The river and harbor act of August 11, 18S8, appropriated 
$135,000 " for the purchase of the Green and Barren River improve- 
ments." The purchase was made accordingly, and the Government 
assumed control of the river, the improvements therein, and the 
property formerly owned by the State December 11, 1888. 

When the United States assumed control the condition of the im- 
provements was as follows: 

Lock and Dam No. 1, Green River, required many repairs. The 
walls of Lock No. 2 were cracked and in bad condition generally. 
the land wall especially so, it being held in position by anchorage to 
cribs filled with stone; the river wall had yielded outward. I. ck 
No. 3, Green River, was broken entirely, the river wall having 
yielded outward and fallen into the river. Lock and Dam No. 4. 
Green River, was in fairly good condition, with the exception of 
needed repairs to the quoins and gates. The walls of Lock No. 1, 
Barren River, were so badly cracked that a part of one of them, the 
land Avail, leaned toward the lock chamber about 6 inches and was 
liable to fall at any time. The entrances to the locks were obstructed 



APPENDIX. 1927 

with deposit and the pools with great numbers of snags, overhanging 
trees, etc. ; the appurtenant structures at the locks and the lock 
tenders' dwellings were in bad condition and inadequate. No snag- 
ging nor dredging plant was available. 

Since the assumption of control by the United States the structures 
of the former system were restored to first-class condition, and two 
new locks and dams, Nos. 5 and 6, on Green River above the mouth 
of Barren River, were added to the system. 

Excepting the funds for rebuilding Lock No. 2, Green River, which 
were provided by specific appropriations, the funds for the restora- 
tion of former structures, the operation of the locks, and maintenance 
of the system in good navigable condition have been provided by 
allotments from the indefinite appropriation for " Operating and care 
of canals and other works of navigation," act of July 5, 1884, as 
amended and reenacted by section 6 of the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1909, under estimates submitted annually at the beginning 
of each fiscal year. The first project for work on these rivers under the 
former act was approved January 4, 1889, and proposed the restora- 
tion, so far as practicable, of the former structures to good service- 
able condition, the construction of new ones where required, the 
operation of the locks, the removal of snags, landslides, and deposit 
from the entrances to the locks, etc., and such has been the general 
object of each subsequent annual estimate and project. 

Loch No. 2, Green River, at Rumsey, Ky. — The deficiency act of 
March 3, 1893, appropriated $65,000 for rebuilding this lock, which 
in 1892 had been reported unsafe for navigation. The subproject 
for the work, approved in 1893, provided for the construction of a 
new lock, on the river side of the old lock, with certain changes in 
existing conditions to conform to the new location. (Annual Report 
for 1900, p. 509.) The original estimate of the cost of this work was 
$170,000. An additional appropriation of $105,000 for completing 
the work .was made by the river and harbor act of August 17, 1894, 
and the lock was completed in 1895. 

Green River, above the mouth of Big Barren River. — Originally 
this part of Green River was much obstructed by snags, large bowl- 
ders, and overhanging trees. Dam No. 4, Green River, afforded 
slack-water navigation for about 18 miles above the confluence of 
Green and Barren Rivers. The fall in that part of the river above 
slack water and below Mammoth Cave, a distance of 29 miles, was 
approximately 27 feet. (Annual Report for 1910, p. 727.) 

A project for the extension of slack- water navigation from the 
upper limits of pool No. 4 to Mammoth Cave by the construction of 
two locks and dams, at an estimated cost of $361,346.40 each, was 
submitted by Maj. D. W. Lockwood, Corps of Engineers, August 11, 

1891. (Printed in Annual Report for 1891, p. 2481.) This project, 
as to Lock No. 5, was adopted by the river and harbor act of July 13, 

1892, and as to Lock No. 6 by the river and harbor act of June 13, 
1902. No revision of the project or estimate was made, except as 
provided by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, for work of 
snagging and clearing the banks of that part of Nolin River which 
would be affected by slack water from Dam No. 6, Green River. For 
this purpose the sum of $5,000 was made available. Lock No. 5 was 
completed in 1899 and Lock No. 6 in 1905. 



1928 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 
EXPENDITURES. 

Purchase of original improvements, appropriation Aug. 11, 1888__ $135, 000. 00 
Operation and maintenance, including restoration 
and repair of original structures: 

From allotments from the indefinite appropri- 
ation for operating and care, etc., acts of 

July 5, 1884, and Mar. 3, 1909 $1, 989, 515. 46 

Appropriations for rebuilding Lock No. 2 — 

Act of Mar. 3, 1893 65, 000. 00 

Act of Aug. 18, 1894 105, 000. 00 

2, 159, 515. 46 

New work: 

Appropriations for construction of Locks Nos. 
5 and 6— 

Act of July 13, 1892 50, 000. 00 

Act of Aug. 18, 1894 25, 000. 00 

Act of June 3, 1896 20, 000. 00 

Act of Mar. 3, 1899 85, 673. 20 

Act of June 13, 1902 180, 000. 00 

Providing for snagging in Nolin River, act of 

Mar. 3, 1905 5, 000. 00 

365, 673. 20 
Deduct amount carried to surplus fund of the 
Treasury 245. 04 

365, 428. 16 

Total to June 30, 1915 2, 659, 943. 62 

4. ROUGH RIVER, KY. 

Shortly after the Civil War a stock company built a timber-crib lock 
and dam on the river about 8 miles from its mouth that gave slack- 
water navigation to Hartford, Ky, a distance of 29 J- miles from the 
mouth of the river. The venture ultimately proved to be unprofit- 
able, and the structures were abandoned by the company. At the time 
the Government undertook the work of improvement the dam had 
been torn out and the lock was in ruins. A project, with estimate, 
submitted by Capt. James C. Post, Corps of Engineers, January 27, 
1885 (Annual Report for 1885, p. 1894), providing for clearing the 
river of obstructions and the construction of a lock and dam to 
carry slack water to Hartford, Ky., was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of September 19, 1890. The subproject and estimate were 
subsequently modified in 1891 and 1895, changing the dimensions of 
the structures and substituting a concrete lock and abutment for the 
masonry lock and timber abutment originally proposed. The lock 
was completed in 1896 and the removal of the obstructions con- 
templated in the project in 1899. The lock and dam afford slack 
water to Hartford, Ky., for boats not exceeding 123 feet in length. 27 
feet in width and draft not exceeding 4 feet at pool stage. The lock 
was opened to navigation December 12, 1896, and has been in opera- 
tion since that date. 

EXPENDITURES. 

Construction of lock and dam and removal of obstructions $105. 500 

The reports on examination and survey, with original estimates, 
State laws, etc., may be found in the Annual Report of the Chief of 



APPENDIX. 1929 

Engineers for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1885, pages 1898 to 
1903. 

For drawing, showing general plan and sections of lock, and fram- 
ing for concrete forms, see the Annual Report of the Chief of Engi- 
neers for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1896, page 2280. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY, GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE SECOND CINCIN- 
NATI, OHIO, DISTRICT. 



3. BIG SANDY RIVER AND TUG AND LEVISA FORKS, W. VA., AND KY. 

The original project, adopted in the act of June 18, 1878, provided 
for the removal of rocks, snags, and overhanging trees on the main 
river and Tug and Levisa Forks. 

The project was based on House Document No. 75 (Pt. 10), Forty- 
third Congress, second session (Annual Report for 1875, Pt. 1, pp. 
756-769) which contained a report of examination and survey of the 
river from its mouth to Piketon (Pikeville) and to Warfield, in Ken- 
tucky, made in compliance with provisions of the river and harbor 
act of June 23, 1874. This report recommended, in addition to the 
removal of channel obstructions, the canalization of the river by the 
construction of 22 locks and dams at an estimated cost of $1,922,536, 
but it was not until 1880 that this latter feature of the improvement 
was undertaken. 

By the act of June 14, 1880, the project was modified to provide for 
a lock and fixed dam near Louisa, Ky., continuing in force the project 
for removing obstructions. At the close of the fiscal year ending 
June 30, 1892, the lock had been completed and equipped, the abut- 
ment had been constructed, and a part — 80 feet — of permanent dam 
had been constructed. The construction of a fixed dam was, at this 
period of the work, opposed by the timber and shipping interests, 
and, under date of May 20, 1891, a board of engineer officers was con- 
stituted by Special Orders No. 31 " to consider and report upon the 
subject of the dam to be built in the Big Sandy River." In its final 
report (Annual Report for 1892, p. 2102) the board recommended 
the substitution of a needle dam in place of a fixed dam, and by the 
act of July 13, 1892, the project was modified to provide for the dam 
to be movable. 

The whole work was completed in 1896 at a total cost of $356,590.66. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY, GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE DULUTH, MINN., 
DISTRICT. 

3. HARBOR AT DULUTH, MINN, AND SUPERIOR, WIS. 

The original project adopted by the river and harbor act of March 
2, 1867, was for Superior City Harbor and provided for a rock pro- 
tection to the beach on Minnesota Point, narrowing gradually the 
outlet of the bay to 350 feet by cribwork, constructing two parallel 
piers composed of stone-filled cribs, the weather pier (Wisconsin) 



1930 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

extending to 18-foot depth of water in the lake, all at a total esti- 
mated cost of $263,300. (Annual Report for 1868, pp. 26 and 81.) 
There was expended under this project about $258,000. (Annual 
Report for 1886, p. 1633.) 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1871, 
was the first project in which reference is made to Duluth. It pro- 
vided for the extension of the 400-foot breakwater (originally built 
by the Northern Pacific Railway Co.) by adding 2,622 feet to its 
length, at an estimated cost of $387,252.89. This breakwater was 
abandoned in 1872, after being wrecked by a storm. But little use 
has been made of the outside harbor since. There was expended, 
under the project of 1871, $110,000. (Annual Report for 1870, pp. 
38, 125; for 1871, pp. 30, 107; and for 1886, p. 1628.) 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1873, 
provided for dredging in the Bay of Superior from the natural 
entrance to the docks of Superior and Duluth and preserving both 
lake entrances. (Annual Report for 1873, p. 129.) The original 
estimate was $269,739.25. The object was to maintain the Superior 
entrance and the canal built by the city of Duluth and the Northern 
Pacific Railway Co. and to provide channels within the harbor for 
vessels to reach the docks of Superior and Duluth. Dredging was 
to be carried to a depth of 13 feet below low-water datum. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1881 
(H. Doc. No. 82, 46th Cong., 2d sess.), provided for the maintenance 
of the harbors at Duluth and Superior City and the enlargement 
of the dredged areas and channels of these harbors by dredging to 16 
feet below low-water datum. This work provided for the enlarge- 
ment of Duluth Harbor by dredging as follows: On a line from 
Rices Point to Minnesota Point, on a line from the Blast Furnace 
docks to intersect with the channel of the St. Louis River, on a line 
parallel to Minnesota Point, and along the west side of Rices Point, 
in St. Louis Bay, all at an estimated cost of $187,988.36, with $25,000 
for maintenance of canal piers, or a total of $212,988.36. (Annual 
Report for 1881, pp. 2028, 2029, 269 ; 1882, pp. 2103, 2104, 264.) For 
Superior City Harbor it included deepening the channel in the entry 
between the piers; dredging channel from the entry to a point be- 
yond the mouth of the Nemadji River, around and parallel to the 
shore of Superior Bay to Quebec wharf, a distance of 8,400 feet; 
thence from the Quebec wharf along the west side of the bay to an 
intersection with the channel of the St. Louis River opposite Connors 
Point and up the Nemadji River for about one-half mile, the whole at 
a cost of $287,080, with $25,000 for pier maintenance, or an estimated 
total cost of $312,080. (Annual Report for 1881, pp. 2026-2029. 
268, 269, 270; 1882, pp. 2095, 2096.) The river and harbor act of 
July 5, 1884, modified the project of 1881 by adding to the channels 
to be improved the channel of the St. Louis River within the Bay 
of Superior, increasing the cost of the improvement by $33,000. 
bringing the total estimated cost up to $345,080. (Annual Report 
for 1885, pp. 1945, 1959.) 

The river and harbor act of August 5, 1886, further modified the 
project of 1881 by adding the improvement of St. Louis Bay. which 
provided for the dredging along the dock line on the Wisconsin 
shore from deep water at Connors Point toward deep water at 
Grassy Point. (Annual Report for 1887, p. 289.) 



APPENDIX. 1931 

By the river and harbor act of August 11, 1888, the project of 1881 
was still further modified by a provision of $28,000 for the exten- 
sion of the new channel along Bices Point and $40,000 for a channel 
along the north shore of St. Louis Bay. (Annual Report for 1888, 
p. 1805.) 

The river and harbor act of July 13, 1892, again modified the act 
of 1881 and authorized the expenditure of $45,000, or as much thereof 
as may be necessary, to be used in the discretion of the Secretary of 
War for improving the channel of St. Louis River above Grassy 
Point. (Annual Report for 1893, pp. 337, 2659 ; H. Doc. No. 58, 52d 
Cong., 1st sess.) 

6. HARBOR AT ONTONAGON, MICH. 

The previous project for the improvement of Ontonagon Harbor 
was based on a report and estimate submitted in 1867 and adopted by 
the river and harbor act of March 2, 1867. It contemplated the 
improvement of the mouth of Ontonagon River by the construction 
of two parallel timber-crib piers about 2,500 feet long and 250 feet 
apart, extending into the lake to the 18-foot curve of depth, and 
dredging a channel 12 feet deep at low water between them. 

The estimated cost was $363,770. 

The improvement was begun in 1867 and was considered completed 
in 1889. The west pier was built to a length of 2,675 feet and the 
east pier 2,315 feet. A channel 12 feet deep was dredged between the 
piers and through the bar in the lake. This channel filled up to a 
greater or less extent by freshets in the river and required frequent 
redredging. A total of 10,546 cubic yards for improvement and 302,- 
452 cubic yards for maintenance was dredged prior to the adoption of 
the present project. This dredging was done to maintain a channel 
100 feet wide and 12 feet deep through the bar in the lake and between 
the piers. 

The total amount expended on the previous project was $284,801.24 
for improvement and $113,326.76 for maintenance. 

7. KEWEENAW WATERWAY, MICH. 

The river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, provided as fol- 
lows: 

For the purchase of the two canals known as the Portage Lake & River Im- 
provement Co. Canal, from Keweenaw Bay to Portage Lake, and the Lake 
Superior Ship Canal Railway & Iron Co. Canal, from Portage Lake to Lake Supe- 
rior, being the water communication across Keweenaw Point, Lake Superior, 
from Keweenaw Bay to Lake Superior, in the State of Michigan, by way of 
the Portage River and Lake and the artificial cut made by said companies to 
render them available to commerce and navigation, together with the works 
of improvement on Portage Lake; the harbor works upon Lake Superior and 
Keweenaw Bay, with all lands and franchises connected therewith, free from 
all incumbrances, $350,000: Provided, That for the purpose of preserving and 
continuing the use and navigation of said canals the sum of $10,000 for each of 
the present and the next fiscal year be appropriated, * * * or so much thereof 
as may be necessary, to pay the actual expenses of operating and keeping the 
said canals in repair * * * 

A valid title to all of said premises having been vested in the 
United States, and the State of Michigan having ceded the required 
jurisdiction over the same, the purchase money was paid to the said 



1932 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

companies and the United States assumed control of the canals 
August 3, 1891. (Annual Report for 1801, pp. 17, 18.) 

The original project was based on a report of a board of engineers 
dated December 22, 1886. (Annual Report for 1887, p. 1977 ; H. Doc. 
No. 105, 49th Cong., 2d sess.) The project was adopted by the river 
and harbor act of September 19, 1890, and provided for (1) a 16-foot 
channel of 70-foot bottom width from bay to lake; (2) a renewal of 
the canal revetments; (3) a reconstruction of the piers at the Lake 
Superior entrance and their extension to 30-foot depth of water; (4) 
the extension of the pier at the Keweenaw entrance to 20-foot depth 
of water; (5) at the proper time hereafter to increase the channel 
depth to 20 feet, with a corresponding width, which should not be 
less than 120 feet. The river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, author- 
ized the Secretary of War to enter into contracts for material and 
work to the extent of $1,065,000 ; not more than $400,000 of this, how- 
ever, to be expended in any one fiscal year. (Annual Report for 1896, 
p. 2359.) 

The full estimate for the project, including purchase and increase 
of depth to 20 feet with a width of 120 feet, $2,375,000, of which 
$350,000 was purchase money, leaving $2,025,000 as estimate for 
improvement. (H. Doc. No. 105, 49th Cong., 2d sess. ; Annual Report 
for 1896, p. 2358.) Under date of March 15, 1898, the Chief of Engi- 
neers authorized the deepening of the channels to 20 feet and increas- 
ing their width to 120 feet. The entire project, including the change 
to the 20-foot depth and 120-foot width, was completed at a cost of 
only $45,000 in excess of the estimate for 16-foot depth and $715,000 
less than the estimate for the 20-foot project. 

10. HARBOR AT MARQUETTE, MICH. 

The original project was based on an estimate by Maj. W. F. 
Raynolds, Corps of Engineers, made in 1866, for the construction of 
a breakwater composed of cribs filled with rock, and projecting from 
the shore into the bay a distance of 2,000 feet, at an estimated cost of 
$385,129.58. 

It was adopted by the river and harbor act of March 2, 1867. and 
provided for the above construction at the same estimated cost. 
(H. Doc. No. 56, 39th Cong., 2d sess.; Annual Report for 1866. pp. 8, 
77.) Work was commenced in August, 1867, and 2,010 linear feet 
had been completed in 1875. (Annual Report for 1875, pp. 2 and 
11.) The river and harbor act of August 11, 1888, provided for the 
further extension of 1,000 linear feet to the breakwater, at an esti- 
mated cost of $121,000. (Annual Report for 1889, pp. 272, 2021.) 
This extension differed from the portion previously constructed in 
that it provided a foundation of rubble stone to support the cribs. 
Work was commenced on the 1,000-foot extension in July, 1889. 
(Annual Report for 1890, pp. 245, 2300.) The extension was prose- 
cuted under succeeding appropriations and completed in 1894. 

A plan for a concrete superstructure to cover 2,000 linear feet of 
the breakwater, at an estimated cost of $149.454. 36, was approved by 
the Chief of Engineers February 27, 1890. (Annual Report for 1890, 
pp. 245, 2301.) This estimate was increased in 1891 to $232,936.71, to 
cover 3,000 feet of breakwater. (Annual Report for 1891, pp. 315, 
2506.) Work on the concrete superstructure was commenced in 1895 
and completed to a length of 2,920 feet in 1905. (Annual Report for 



APPENDIX. 1933 

1906, pp. 574, 1726.) For detailed description of the concrete work, 
with drawings, photographic views, costs, etc., see Annual Reports 
for 1896, pages 2365 to 2385 ; 1897, pages 2615 to 2638 ; 1898, pages 
2252 to 2282. The Annual Report for 1901, pages 2775 and 2776, de- 
scribes the cross section of the latest portion of the work. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE MILWAUKEE. 
WIS., DISTRICT. 



1. MANISTIQUE HARBOR, MICH. 

The first survey of the mouth of the Manistique River with a view 
ito its improvement by the United States was made in 1873. (Annual 
Report for 1873, p. 251.) A plan and estimate was submitted, but 
no appropriation was made. In 1879 an examination of this locality 
was made. (Annual Report for 1880, p. 1931.) It was found that 
since the survey of 1873 local interests had constructed piers at the 
mouth of the river and had done some dredging. As a result of this 
examination an appropriation was made, and a small amount of 
dredging was done by the United States in 1880, when operations 
were suspended until 1909. About 1883 private parties built a tim- 
ber-crib breakwater about 420 feet long, protecting the mouth of the 
river. 

The original project, adopted by river and harbor act of June 14, 
1880, provided for increasing the depth of channel to 13 feet below 
mean lake level, 1860-1875, for a width of 150 feet. The length of 
channel was not stated. There was no modification of the original 
project. 

2. MENOMINEE HARBOR AND RIVER, MICH. AND WIS. 

The first survey at the mouth of the Menominee River with a view 
to its improvement by the United States was made in 1867. (Annual 
Report for 1867, p. 132.) The improvement was begun in 1871, and 
until 1890 was confined to pier construction and dredging at the 
mouth of the river. The improvement of the river above its mouth 
was begun in 1890, and consisted entirely of dredging. 

The harbor and river, which originally constituted separate works, 
were consolidated by the river and harbor act of June 13, 1902. 

Harbor. — The original project was adopted by river and harbor act 
of March 3, 1871, and provided for two parallel piers 400 feet apart, 
the north pier to be about 1,550 feet long and the south pier about 
1,950 feet long, and for a channel between the piers 15 feet deep 
below mean lake level, 1860-1875. 

This project was modified by river and harbor act of September 19, 
1890, increasing the depth of channel to 17 feet, and again modified 
by river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, increasing the depth to 20 
feet below mean lake level, 1860-1875. (H. Doc. No. 86, 54th Cong., 
2d sess.) 

River. — The original project was adopted by river and harbor act 
of September 19, 1890 (H. Doc. No. 34, 51st" Cong., 1st sess.), and 



1934 REPOKT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

provided for a channel 17 feet dee]) below mean lake level, 1860- 
1875, 200 feet wide, and extending "up the river from termination 
of old work" to N. Ludington & Co.'s mill, a distance of about 
8,675 feet. 

This project was modified by river and harbor act of July 13, 1892, 
reducing the width of the upper 2,600 feet of the channel to 100 feet. 
(Annual Report for 1891, p. 2529.) It was again modified by river 
and harbor act of June 3, 1896, increasing width of channel at upper 
end to 250 feet for a distance of 600 feet, forming a turning basin 
and extending the main channel, as it then existed, a distance of 425 
feet to the west line of Wells Street, with a width of 75 feet; the 
depths in turning basin and channel extension to be 17 feet below 
mean lake level, 1860-1875. 

3. OCONTO HARBOR, WIS. 

The first survey at the mouth of the Oconto River^with a view to 
its improvement by the United States was made in 1870. A plan and 
estimate based on this survey was submitted, but no appropriation 
was made. (Annual Eeport for 1871, p. 120.) In 1879 an examina- 
tion of this locality was made and another plan and estimate sub- 
mitted. (Annual Report for 1880, p. 1973.) Prior to beginning the 
improvement by the United States the city of Oconto built two par- 
allel piers at the mouth of the river, the north pier 400 feet long, 
and the south pier 600 feet long, and did a small amount of dredg- 
ing- 

The first appropriation for the improvement of this harbor was 

made by river and harbor act of March 3, 1881, for the purpose of 
aiding the city in the work it had already begun. 

The original project for improvement by the United States was 
adopted by river and harbor act of August 2, 1882, and provided for 
extending the piers built by the city to the 11-foot contour in Green 
Bay, the extension to north pier being about 1,200 feet, and that to the 
south pier about 1,500 feet, and for a channel 100 feet wide and 9 
feet deep below mean lake level, 1860-1875, extending up the river 
a distance of about 2 miles. A modification of this project, approved 
by the Chief of Engineers March 11, 1897. provided for abandon- 
ing the upper 3,800 feet of the river channel. 

4. GREEN BAY HARBOR, WIS. 

No improvement of this harbor was undertaken prior to beginning 
same by the United States in 1866. 

The original project, adopted by river and harbor act of June 23, 
1866, provided for a channel 200 feet wide and 12 feet deep, extend- 
ing from the mouth of Fox River northerly in Green Bay. a distance 
of about 8,800 feet, and for the protection of the cut through Grassy 
Island by revetments. This project was modified by river and 
harbor act of June 23, 1874, increasing the depth to 15 feet and 
the length of channel to 11.600 feet. It was again modified by river 
and harbor act of July 13, 1892, increasing the depth to 17 feet and 
length to 16,500 feet, and providing for a channel 150 feet wide and 
13 feet deep below mean lake level, 1860-1875, in the Fox River 



APPENDIX. 1935 

between the cities of Green Bay and Depere. The project was again 
modified by river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, increasing depth 
in channel between Green Bay and Depere to 17 feet. A further 
modification, approved by the Chief of Engineers March 9, 1897, 
provided for increasing width of channel in Green Bay at the outer 
or northerly end to 500 feet. 

6. STURGEON BAY AND LAKE MICHIGAN SHIP CANAL, WIS. 

By an act of April 10, 1866, 200,000 acres of the public lands were 
"granted to the State of Wisconsin for the purpose of aiding said 
State in constructing and completing a breakwater and harbor and 
a ship canal to connect the waters of Green Bay with the waters of 
Lake Michigan." In 1871 a survey was made by the United States 
and plans and estimates prepared for the construction of the canal. 
(Annual Keport for 1872, p. 171.) The Sturgeon Bay & Lake Michi- 
gan Ship Canal & Harbor Co.. chartered by the State of Wisconsin, 
between 1872 and 1881, constructed a canal without locks or gates 
7,200 feet long, 100 feet wide at water surface, and 14 feet deep below 
mean lake level, 1860-1875, and in continuation of the canal dredged 
a channel in Sturgeon Bay 6,100 feet long, of about the same dimen- 
sions as the canal. Protection works, constituting what was known 
as the " Harbor of refuge," at the Lake Michigan entrance to the 
canal were constructed by the United States, such work having 
begun in 1873. The river and harbor act of July 13, 1892, provided 
for the acquisition of the canal by the United States, pursuant to 
which the United States assumed control on April 25, 1893. 

Prior to the river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, the canal and 
harbor of refuge connected therewith constituted two works. By 
this act they were consolidated. 

Harbor. — The original project, adopted by river and harbor act 
of March 3, 1873, provided for the construction of converging piers, 
each about 1,200 feet long, 850 feet apart at the shore line, and 250 
feet apart at outer end, inclosing an area of about 10 acres; the in- 
closed basin, or so much as necessary for requirements of navigation, 
was to be dredged to a depth of 13 feet below mean lake level, 1860- 
1875. This project was modified by river and harbor act of June 14, 
1880, providing for extending each pier 150 feet by detached cribs, 
increasing width of entrance to 335 feet, and increasing the depth 
of channel to 17 feet. 

Canal. — The original project, adopted by river and harbor act of 
August 18, 1894, provided for increasing width of canal to 160 feet, 
and for a channel 15 feet deep below mean lake level, 1860-1875. 
This project was modified by river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, 
increasing width of westerly 1,000 feet of the canal to 250 feet. 

7. ALGOMA HARBOR, WIS. 

This harbor was originally called Ahnapee. The first survey 
with a view to its improvement by the United States was made in 

1870. (Annual Beport for 1871, p. 125.) 

The original project adopted by river and harbor act of March 3, 

1871, provided for the formation of an outer harbor or basin cover- 



1936 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

ing the mouth of the Ahnapee River b}' breakwater construction and 
dredging, the area of inclosed basin to be about 00 acres; the depth 
to be obtained is not known. This project was modified by subse- 
quent river and harbor acts as follows: March 3, 1873, providing for 
a small harbor at the mouth of the river by constructing parallel 
piers and dredging between them; March 3, 1875, providing for an 
extension of the piers to the 18-foot contour in Lake Michigan and 
the formation of a small inner harbor in the river 100 feet wide and 
13 feet deep below mean lake level, 1860-1875, extending from the 
highway bridge to the mouth of the river, a distance of about 1,000 
feet; July 5, 1884, providing for extending the piers in Lake Michi- 
gan and increasing width of entrance to 200 feet; March 3, 1899, 
providing for extending the 13-foot channel up the river for a dis- 
tance of 800 feet above the highway bridge, the width of the exten- 
sion to be 50 feet. 

8. KEWAUNEE HARBOR, WIS. 

The first survey of the mouth of the Kewaunee River with a view 
to its improvement by the United States was made in 1836 ; a plan 
of improvement and estimate of cost were prepared. (S. Doc. No. 
175, 25th Cong., 2d sess.) In 1873 another survey was made in ac- 
cordance with river and harbor act of March 3, 1873. (Annual Re- 
port for 1873, p. 258.) A third survey was made in 1880 in accord- 
ance with river and harbor act of June 14, 1880. (Annual Report 
for 1881, p. 2082.) In the meantime local authorities had raised 
$8,000 for harbor purposes, none of which had been expended. 

The original project was adopted by river and harbor act of March 
3, 1881, and provided for an artificial entrance channel 15 feet deep 
below mean lake level, 1860-1875, located about 2,000 feet south of the 
river mouth, protected by two parallel piers 200 feet apart, and each 
1,650 feet long, extending from the shore to the 19-foot contour in 
Lake Michigan. There was no modification of this project prior to 
the adoption of the existing project. 

On June 1, 1881, the Government entered into contract for the 
construction of 500 linear feet of pile pier. Payments to the extent 
of $8,042.72 on materials and labor used under this contract were 
made by the Kewaunee harbor commissioners, the balance being 
paid by the United States. (Annual Report for 1882, p. 2141.) 

9. TWO RIVERS HARBOR, WIS. 

The first survey of this harbor with a view to its improvement by 
the United States was made in 1870. (Annual Report for 1871, 
p. 111.) 

The original project adopted by river and harbor act of March 
3, 1871, provided for the formation of channel of navigable width 
and 13 feet deep below mean lake level, 1860-1875, connecting Twin 
Rivers and Lake Michigan, the channel to be protected by parallel 
piers, 260 feet apart, and about 1,750 feet long, extending to the 
19-foot contour in Lake Michigan. A modification of this project, 
providing for terminating the piers at the 14- foot contour, was ap- 
proved by the Chief of Engineers February 27, 1897. 



APPENDIX. 1937 

10. MANITOWOC HARBOR, WIS. 

The first survey at the mouth of the Manitowoc River with a 
view to its improvement by the United States was made in 1836. A 
plan and estimate for construction of piers was submitted in 1838. 
(S. Doc. No. 175, 25th Cong., 2d sess.) No further action was taken 
until Congress appropriated $8,000 by river and harbor act of August 
30, 1852, for the improvement of this harbor. A second survey was 
made in 1853 and another plan and estimate prepared and submitted. 

The original project was adopted in 1851, based upon the last 
plan and estimate; the month and day when the project was formally 
adopted is unknown. This project provided for building parallel 
piers 220 feet apart, the length of the north pier to be about 1,050 
feet and of the south pier about 950 feet, and for dredging between 
the piers to obtain a channel 12 feet deep. This project was subse- 
quently modified by river and harbor acts as follows : March 3, 1881, 
the depth at entrance was increased to 19 feet, and at the shore line 
to 15 feet below mean lake level, 1860-1875, and the piers were ex- 
tended to the 19^-foot contour; September 19, 1890, provided for an 
exterior breakwater 400 feet long and 24 feet wide; June 3, 1896, 
provided for increasing the depth of channel throughout to 20 feet 
below mean lake level, and for extending south pier 500 feet (H. 
Doc. No. 300, 54th Cong., 1st sess.) ; June 13, 1902, provided for ex- 
tending the breakwater lakeward 400 feet (H. Doc. No. 233, 56th 
Cong., 1st sess.). 

11. SHEBOYGAN HARBOR, WIS. 

The first survey at the mouth of the Sheboygan River with a view 
to its improvement by the United States was made in 1836. A plan 
and estimate for the construction of piers and dredging were sub- 
mitted in 1838. (S. Doc. No. 175, 25th Cong., 2d sess., p. 10.) No 
further action was taken until Congress appropriated $10,000 by 
river and harbor act of ^August 30, 1852, for the improvement of this 
harbor. This appropriation, together with $55,000 raised by the 
city and county of Sheboygan, 1852-1860, was expended by the local 
authorities in pier construction and dredging to a depth of 12 feet. 

The original project, adopted by river and harbor act of June 23, 
1866, provided for extending the piers built by local authorities 120 
feet on the north and 320 feet on the south pier, and for dredging 
between the piers to obtain a channel 13 feet deep below mean lake 
level, 1860-1875. This project was subsequently modified by river 
and harbor acts as follows: March 3, 1873, the channel depth was 
increased to 17 feet below mean lake level ; March 3, 1881, providing 
for extending the piers to the 21-foot contour, and increasing depth 
at entrance to 19 feet, diminishing to 15 feet at the shore line ; August 
18, 1894, providing for increasing the width between the piers and 
for a channel 19 feet deep throughout; March 3, 1899, providing for 
an exterior breakwater 700 feet long on north side of entrance (H. 
Doc. No. 53, 55th Cong., 3d sess.) ; June 13, 1902, providing for ex- 
tending the north pier 200 feet, and the south pier 600 feet, and for 
a channel 21 feet deep (H. Doc. No. 327, 54th Cong., 2d sess.). 
8373°— eng 1915 122 



1938 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, TJ. S. ARMY. 
12. PORT WASHINGTON HARBOR, WIS. 

At an early but unknown date a survey was made at the mouth 
of the Sauk Elver and a plan of improvement was submitted to the 
Board of United States Engineers for building two parallel piers 
200 feet apart and for a basin 600 feet long and 200 feet wide inside 
the shore line. Nothing further was done toward the improvement 
of this harbor until 1869, when a survey was made pursuant to a reso- 
lution of the Committee of Commerce of the House of Representa- 
tives and a plan of improvement with estimate of cost was submitted. 
(Annual Report for 1870, p. 119.) 

The original project was adopted by river and harbor act of July 
11, 1870, and provided for a channel 13 feet deep below mean lake 
level, 1860-1875, between parallel piers, 150 feet apart, and for a basin 
600 feet long, 200 feet wide inside the shore line. This project was 
modified by the river and harbor act of August 14, 1876, providing 
for a second basin to the northward and nearly at right angles to 
the first basin of practically the same dimensions as the west basin. 

13. MILWAUKEE HARBOR, WIS., INCLUDING HARBOR OF REFUGE. 

The first survey of this harbor with a view to its improvement by 
the United States was made in 1836. A plan and estimate for the 
construction of piers and dredging were submitted in 1838. (S. Doc. 
No. 175, 25th Cong., 2d sess.) No further action was taken until 
Congress appropriated $30,000 by act of March 3, 1843. 

The first survey of Milwaukee Bay with a view to the creation 
•of a harbor of refuge was made in 1880, pursuant to an item in river 
and harbor act of June 14, 1880, which reads: " Improving the bayou 
south of Milwaukee Harbor for additional purposes of a harbor of 
refuge at Milwaukee; also, Milwaukee Bay." Plans and estimates 
were prepared and reviewed by a board of engineers. (Annual 
Report for 1881, p. 2116.) 

Milwaukee Harbor and the harbor of refuge, which were originally 
separate works, were consolidated by the act of June 13, 1902. 

Harbor. — The original project for the improvement of Milwaukee 
Harbor, adopted by act of March 3, 1843, provided for dredging at 
the original river mouth to a depth of 12 feet and protecting the 
entrance by parallel piers 260 feet apart. This project was modified 
by the river and harbor act of August 30, 1852, which provided for 
the formation of a channel 260 feet wide and 13 feet deep below mean 
Jake level, 1860-1875, located 3,000 feet to the northward of original 
mouth of the Milwaukee River, by dredging across the overlapping 
point and protecting the channel by parallel piers, each 1,120 feet 
long. The project, as modified, was carried out mainly by the citv 
of Milwaukee, which, between 1852 and 1870, expended $445,971.20 
on account of the harbor. The project was again modified by river 
and harbor act of April 10, 1869, which provided for extending each 
pier 600 feet. A modification adopted by the river and harbor net of 
March 3, 1899, provided for deepening the channel to 2] feet below 
mean lake level, 1860-1875. (H. Doc. No. 61. 51th Cong., 2d sess.) 

Harbor of refuge. — The original project for the harbor of refuge 
was adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1881, and pro- 
vided for a breakwater 7,650 feet long, including an opening therein 



APPENDIX. 1939 

of 400 feet. This project was modified June 29, 1893, by authority 
of the Secretary of War. to provide for the deposit of riprap along 
the sides of the breakwater wherever necessary. (See Annual Report 
for 1894, p. 2082.) 

The river and harbor acts of June 13, 1902, and March 3, 1905, 
provided for building concrete superstructure on the north harbor 
pier and on 3,150 feet of the northern end of the breakwater. 

15. RACINE HARBOR, WIS. 

The first survey at the mouth of the Root River with a view to its 
improvement by the United States was made in 1836, and plans and 
estimates of cost of the improvement were prepared. ( S. Doc. No. 175, 
25th Cong., 2d sess., p. 5.) No appropriation for the improvement 
of this harbor was made until by special act of June 15, 184-1, $12,500 
was appropriated i; to aid in the completion of a harbor already com- 
menced by the citizens of the town of Racine, at the mouth of Root 
River, in the Territory of Wisconsin." 

The original project, adopted by the citizens in 1812-43, provided 
for a channel 12 feet deep between parallel piers 160 feet apart. 
This project was modified by river and harbor act of June 23, 1866, 
which provided for increasing the depth to 16 feet and for extension 
of piers. The project was further modified by the river and harbor 
act of March 3, 1899, which provided for widening the channel and 
increasing depth to 21 feet below mean lake level, 1860-1875, for ex- 
tending the south pier 300 feet, and for a breakwater 600 feet long. 
(H. Doc. No. 326. 54th Cong., 2d sess., and H. Doc. No. 165, 55th 
Cong., 3d sess.) The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, pro- 
vided for change in the location and direction of the breakwater. 

16. KENOSHA HARBOR, WIS. 

The first survey of the harbor of Southport, now Kenosha, Wis., 
with a view to its improvement by the United States, was made in 
1837, and a plan and estimate were prepared. (S. Doc. No. 103, 
25th Cong., 2d sess., p. 18.) An act approved June 15, 1844, appro- 
priated $12,500 " for the construction of a harbor at the town of 
Southport, in the Territory of Wisconsin." An act approved March 
3, 1845, appropriated the further sum of $15,000 " for the purpose of 
aiding in the completion of the harbor already commenced at the 
town of Southport, in the Territory of Wisconsin." There is no 
available record of what improvements were made, or by whom, with 
these appropriations. 

The original project for the improvement of this harbor, so far as 
can be determined from available records, was adopted by river and 
harbor act of August 30, 1852, and provided for a channel 12 feet 
deep between parallel piers 150 feet apart. This project was modi- 
fied by subsequent river and harbor acts as follows: June 23, 1866, 
provided for a navigable channel 16 feet deep; September 19, 1890, 
provided for dredging in "The Basin," being the inner harbor; 
March 3, 1899, provided for extending the south pier 525 feet, for 
increasing the width between the piers to 250 feet by rebuilding the 
north pier, for a breakwater 600 feet long, and for increasing the 
depths in channel and basin to 21 feet and 20 feet, respectively, be- 



1940 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

low mean lake level, 1860-1875. (IT. Doc. No. 328, 54th Cong., 2d 
sess., and H. Doc. No. 164, 55th Cong., 3d sess.) ; June 13, 1902, pro- 
vided for extending the breakwater 100 feet shoreward. 

17. WAUKEGAN HARBOR, ILL. 

The river and harbor act of August 30, 1852, appropriated $15,000 
" for the improvement of the harbor and breakwater at Waukegan, 
111." A survey was made in 1855, and one crib 30 feet long and 25 
feet wide was placed in line of the proposed breakwater. This crib 
was later carried away during a storm and further work was aban- 
doned. In 1872 a survey was made and plan and estimates prepared 
for an outer harbor. (Annual Report for 1873, p. 247.) Another 
survey was made in 1879 and a further plan and estimate prepared. 
(Annual Report for 1880, p. 1942.) 

The original project, adopted by river and harbor act of June 14, 
1880, provided for an artificial harbor of sufficient capacity for local 
trade by inclosing an area of about 16 acres with pile piers, the depth 
in entrance channel and inclosed area to be 13 feet below mean lake 
level, 1860-1875. This project was modified by river and harbor act 
of August 2, 1882, which provided for moving the harbor entrance 
about 1,200 feet north of the originally proposed entrance and re- 
ducing the area of the inclosed basin to about 10 acres. (Annual 
Report for 1882, pp. 277, 2163.) 

18. FOX RIVER, WIS. 

By an act of Congress, dated August 8, 1846 (chap. 170), the 
United States granted to the State of Wisconsin, upon its admission 
into the Union, a large quantity of land for the purpose of improv- 
ing the navigation on the Fox and Wisconsin Rivers, and construct- 
ing a canal to unite those rivers at or near the portage, the purpose 
being to create a great water highway from the Great Lakes to the 
seaboard. To carry out the object of this act, the State, by acts of 
its legislature, dated June 29 and August 8, 1848, accepted the grant 
and established a board of public works to carry on the work of im- 
provement. 

The State of Wisconsin, by act of the legislature of July 6, 1853, 
incorporated the Fox & Wisconsin Improvement Co. and transferred 
the rights and obligations of the State in the land grant to the com- 
pany. This company failing to accomplish much, the State, by act 
of its legislature dated October 3, 1856, placed the sale of the lands 
and the entire improvement in the hands of a board of trustees. 
who, in 1863, filed a bill of complaint and. on February 4. 1864. judg- 
ment of foreclosure was entered. On August 15, 1866, the property 
was sold to the Green Bav & Mississippi Canal Co. 

The State of Wisconsin, by act of March 23, 1871. authorized the 
Green Bay & Mississippi Canal Co. to sell and dispose of its rights 
and property to the United States. At that time the entire improve- 
ment was valued at $1,048,070, from which was deducted $723,070, 
the estimated amount received from the sale of lands, leaving a bal- 
ance of $325,000 to be paid to the canal company. The Secretary of 
War determined that the personal property, appraised at $40,000, 



APPENDIX. 1941 

and the franchises of the corporation, including the water powers, 
appraised at $140,000, were not required for the purposes of naviga- 
tion and were deducted from the above amount, leaving a balance of 
$145,000. This amount was appropriated by the river and harbor 
act of June 10, 1872, and paid to the canal company. 

At the time of the transfer, with the exception of one stone lock, 
the structures were all temporary and in bad condition. The first 
project of the State contemplated the construction of canals 40 feet 
wide at bottom with 4 feet depth at usual low water, and locks 125 
feet long between gates and 30 feet wide in the chamber. The 
plans of the Fox & Wisconsin Improvement Co. increased the length 
of the locks to 160 feet, the width to 35 feet, and the depth to 5 feet on 
the miter sills. 

The original project for the improvement of the Fox and Wiscon- 
sin Rivers was adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1873. 
The general plan adopted was: (1) the repair and replacing of ex- 
isting works on Fox River, (2) the construction of additional locks 
and dams to complete the system of slackwater navigation on the 
upper Fox, (3) the deepening and widening of channels in the 
various levels, (4) the completion of the improvement of the Wis- 
consin River by contracting and fixing the low-water channel; and, 
finally, the replacing of all the existing locks and dams by perma- 
nent work. (Annual Report for 1873, p. 36.) 

The improvement of the Wisconsin River, consisting in the con- 
struction of wing dams, dikes, and snagging, was abandoned in 1887, 
upon the recommendation of a board of engineers. (Annual Report 
for 1887, p. 2094.) 

Questions having arisen relative to the property rights, rights of 
way, etc., transferred by the Green Bay & Mississippi Canal Co. to 
the United States by deed of 1872, the river and harbor act of June 
3, 1896, provided " for a thorough investigation of the character, 
limitations, and description of the property rights of . the United 
States." Such investigation was made by the Hon. Edward S. 
Bragg, and report, dated February 15, 1898, submitted to the Secre- 
tary of War. (H. Doc. 389, 55th Cong., 2d sess.) 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE CHICAGO, ILL., 
DISTRICT. 



1. CHICAGO HARBOR, ILL. 

The first work of improvement by the Government was in accord- 
ance with act of March 2, 1833, and consisted of cutting and revetting 
with piers a new mouth of Chicago River from a point near old Fort 
Dearborn, where the river approached the shore and turned south- 
ward. The piers have been extended from time to time and the 
channel maintained by dredging. 

While it is known that the cut mentioned and the construction of 
2,614.5 feet of north pier and 719.5 feet of south pier were accom- 



1942 KEPOET OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

plished between 1833 and 1840 (inclusive) with funds appropriated 
by acts of March 2, 1833 ; June 28, 1834; March 3, 1835 ; July 2, 1836 ; 
March 3, 1837; and July 7, 1838, no data are available definitely to 
connect the main or modified projects with any particular one of 
these various acts. During 1852, with funds appropriated by act of 
August 30, 1852, a pierhead 170 feet long was built at the outer ex- 
tremity of the north pier. In 1864 the city of Chicago furnished the 
sum of $75,000 which was expended in dredging and in extending the 
north pier 450 feet, giving it a total length at that time of 3,234.5 
feet. From 1866 to 1869, inclusive, and with funds appropriated by 
acts of June 23, 1866; July 25, 1868; and April 10, 1869, the north 
pier was extended 400 feet beyond the gap of 315 feet made by the 
entrance to Ogden Slip, thus completing 3,634.5 feet of north pier 
work; and 1,148 feet was added to the south pier, making a total of 
1,867.5 feet of completed work in that pier. 

Ogden Slip above referred to was constructed in 1861 by the Chi- 
cago Canal & Dock Co. with permission of the War Department. 
Likewise, Slip A, 175 feet; Slip B, 160 feet; and Slip C, 167 feet wide, 
respectively, were constructed through the south pier in 1864 and 
1865 by the Illinois Central Railroad ^Co. 

Dredging to maintain an average depth of 14 feet was carried on 
intermittently from 1833 to 1870. The amount appropriated and ex- 
pended by the United States, 1833 to 1869 (inclusive), was $446,005. 

For a more voluminous and detailed history of this improvement 
from 1833 to 1869, inclusive, see pages 433^38, part 2, of Annual Re- 
port for 1876. 

2. CHICAGO RIVER, ILL. 

The original project, adopted by Congress in the act of June 3, 
1896, provided for 16 feet draft throughout this river, at an estimated 
cost of $700,000. Under this project i7 feet actual depth was secured 
throughout the navigable sections of the river, obstructive projec- 
tions of land in the river were removed, and docks built in places to 
protect new channel. 

The act of June 13, 1902, added to the project a provision for two 
turning basins (one in the North Branch and one in the South 
Branch), to be dredged to a depth of 21 feet, at an estimated cost of 
$500,000, making the total estimated cost of the original project thus 
modified $1,200,000. 

There has been expended on previous projects $1,065,348.42, of 
which $109,462.55 was for maintenance. 

Except for a small amount of rock revetment about the turning 
basin, since constructed, the original project was completed before the 
adoption of the existing project. 

A brief history of river and harbor improvement at Chicago prior 
to 1876 is given on pages 433-438, part 2. Annual Report for 1876, 
and a very full description of present conditions is to be found on 
pages 186-198, Bulletin Xo. 24 (1915). issued by the United States 
Lake Survey Office, Detroit, Mich. For maps of river and turning 
basins, see pages 1892-1893, Annual Report, 1903. 

For general description of the sanitary district projects, see page 
2097, Annual Report for 1902. 



APPENDIX. 1943 

3. CALUMET HARBOR, ILL. 

The earliest Government surveys of this harbor were made in 1836, 
1845, and 1869, and actual work of improvement was later undertaken 
in accordance with act of July 11, 1870, which called for a "harbor 
of refuge," the idea being to afford "relief needed by the crowded 
commerce of Chicago," by furnishing " a safe and practicable en- 
trance to Calumet River and the port of South Chicago." 

With this end in view a beginning was made by cutting through 
the 400-foot wide bar at the point where the river turned south (near 
the present U. S. Coast Guard station) and by constructing parallel 
piers on the north and south side of the river in order to give a 
straight outlet into the lake. 

Under the project adopted by act of July 11, 1870, as modified by 
act of August 11, 1888, and covering the period from 1870 to 1895, in- 
clusive, 3,640 linear feet of north pier and 2,020 linear feet of south 
pier were constructed, and a channel 16 feet deep (Chicago city 
datum) and 200 feet wide dredged between them. The amount ex- 
pended by the United States, 1870-1895 (inclusive), was $454,484.53. 

For a more detailed history of the early work of this improvement 
see pages 441-444, part 2, of Annual Report for 1876. 

4. CALUMET RIVER, ILL. AND IND. 

The project for the improvement of this river, adopted by Con- 
gress in 1884 and modified in 1886, contemplated securing a channel 
200 feet in width and 16 feet in depth from the mouth of the river 
at Calumet Harbor, 111., about 11 miles upward, to a point one-half 
mile east of Hammond, Ind. This project was modified by act of 
June 3, 1896, for Calumet Harbor, so as to provide for dredging the 
channel to 20 feet navigable depth from the mouth 2 miles upward. 

The projects of 1884 to 1896, now terminated, secured a channel 
of 200 feet width and 22 feet actual depth from the mouth of the 
river about 2 miles upstream (including a small turning basin near 
the mouth of the river) ; thence a channel 16 feet deep and 200 feet 
wide about 3 miles farther, except over short portions where rock 
reduced the width to 85 feet and the depth to 14 feet ; and thence a 
temporary channel 10 feet deep and 60 feet wide for the next 6 miles, 
up to a point on the Grand Calumet one-half mile east of Hammond, 
Ind. 

There has been expended on previous projects $446,718.98, includ- 
ing $45,230.48 for maintenance. 

For a more detailed history of the earliest work on this improve- 
ment see pages 441 441, part 2, of Annual Report for 1876. 

5. INDIANA HARBOR, IND. 

The original project, included in the existing project, was adopted 
in act of June 25, 1910, based on recommendations in House Docu- 
ment No. 1113, Sixtieth Congress, second session (without map), and 
embraced the following: 

(1) Completion and maintenance of channel in outer harbor, 300 
feet wide and 22 feet deep, including an entrance channel increasing 
gradually in width and depth from pier ends to lake. 



1944 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

(2) Maintenance of inner harbor channel, 200 feet wide and 20 
feet deep, extending from the outer harbor to the Grand Calumet 
Eiver (about 3.5 miles) and to Lake George (length of branch, 1.5 
miles), this maintenance to be undertaken as fast as the channel is 
dredged by private interests and bridges are provided with proper 
draw openings. 

Interpretations made by this office and by the Chief of Engineers 
require that the inner harbor channel, prior to acceptance for main- 
tenance, shall be 200 feet wide at the surface and 20 feet deep below 
jChicago city datum throughout a center width of at least 80 feet, 
the channel thereafter to be maintained to be limited to that dredged 
by and accepted from private interests. 

The estimated cost of this work was $62,000. No estimate of the 
annual cost of maintenance of the inner harbor has ever been sub- 
mitted, but it was originally estimated that the annual cost of main- 
taining the outer harbor and entrance channel w T ould be $5,000. 

The work of the original project (except maintenance) has been 
completed. 

Under the above project 234,363 cubic yards of material was re- 
moved from the outer and inner harbors, resulting in completing 
both channels to project dimensions as far as the first obstructing 
railroad bridge. The amount expended on this work was $63,176.95, 
of which $2,509.54 was for maintenance. 

The work of the original project (except maintenance) has been 
completed. 

For a more detailed history of the work on this improvement see 
pages 201-203, Bulletin No.' 24 (1914), issued by the U. S. Lake 
Survey office, Detroit, Mich. 

6. MICHIGAN CITY HARBOR, IND. 

The work of improvement of this harbor was commenced by the 
Government in accordance with act of July 3, 1836, and work up 
to 1866 (with funds appropriated by the subsequent acts of Mar. 3, 
1837, July 7, 1838, June 11, 1844, Aug. 30, 1852, and Mar. 2, 1855) 
had been limited to confining the channel at the outlet of Trail Creek 
by east and west piers 1,135 and 994 feet long, respectively, with a 
channel 100 feet wide and 12 feet deep between. 

In accordance with conditions imposed by act of March 2, 1867, 
$100,526.03 was expended by the Michigan City Harbor Co. " in the 
construction of a safe and convenient harbor," but the details of the 
work done by this company are not available. 

In 1868 and 1869, 96 feet were added by the United States to the 
east and 256 feet to the west pier, and during the next season (1869- 
1870) the east pier was further extended 46 feet and the west pier 
242 feet, w T hich brought the ends of both piers to rest in 12 feet 
depth of water, and gave them a total length at that time of 1.277 
and 1,492 feet, respectively. 

Dredging was carried on intermittently during the period 1836- 
1870, but the full amount of work done by either the Government or 
Michigan City Harbor Co. is not known. It is known, however, that 
158,999 cubic yards of material was dredged by the United States 
from the inner harbor from 1866 to 1869, inclusive. 



APPENDIX. 1945 

A brief history of this improvement is given on pages 678-680, 
Annual Report for 1908. (See also pp. 447-45f, Annual Report for 
1876.) 

7. ILLINOIS RIVER, ILL. 

The original project for the improvement of this river, adopted 
by Congress in the act of August 30, 1852, provided for "the im- 
provement of the navigation of the Illinois River " by dredging. 
Cost figures not available. 

The act of April 10, 1869, adopted the plan of slack-water naviga- 
tion from La Salle to the mouth by means of locks and dams, at a 
cost of " something less than two million dollars." 

The act of July 11, 1870, added to the project a provision for 
; ' dredging an open channel 150 feet wide and 4 feet deep at low 
water," and building " catchment and wing dams where necessary 
* * * until the means for slack-water navigation are fully or 
nearly furnished," at an estimated cost of $392,000. 

There resulted from the above projects, now terminated, " channels 
having not less than 4 feet depth through the worst bars, the aggre- 
gate length of dredged channels being about 24 miles; for main- 
taining these channels and contracting the waterway, about 12,000 
linear feet of brush and stone dams were built, and a valuable outfit 
for carrying on this work and the work of dredging had been pro- 
cared. Cooperating with the General Government, the State of 
Illinois built two locks and dams (Henry and Copperas Creek), at 
a cost of $747,747, which gave a depth of 7 feet for a distance of 90 
miles below La Salle, the river terminus of the Illinois and Michigan 
Canal." 

There has been expended on these previous projects $550,450.55. 

For a more detailed history of the earliest work on this improve- 
ment, see pages 1572-1580 of Annual Report for 1879. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OP RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE GRAND RAPIDS, 
MICH, DISTRICT. 



1. (A) ST. JOSEPH HARBOR, MICH. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act ap- 
proved July 4, 1836, as follows : " For the construction of a pier or 
breakwater at the mouth of the river St. Joseph, $20,000." 

Up to 1863 there had been built a north pier about 1,100 feet and 
a south pier about 212 feet long, with a width between piers of 240 
feet and a depth (datum not stated) of 12 feet at the entrance and 9 
feet in the inside basin. These piers protected a cut through the nar- 
row tongue of land north of the old river mouth. The river before 
entering into Lake Michigan spread into a basin 800 feet wide in 
front of the town of St. Joseph, with two distinct channels, one on 
the north side, formed by the water from the Paw Paw River, and 
the other on the south side, being the channel proper of the St. Joseph 
River. (Annual Report for 1876, p. 519.) 



1946 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. AKMY. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act approved June 23, 
1866, provided for the extension of the south pier in the same direc- 
tion 200 feet into the lake ; repairs to 409 feet of the north pier and 
200 feet of the south pier; all at an estimated cost of $28,459.84. The 
pier extension was to be built of piles cut off at water surface, with a 
superstructure of cribwork, the whole to be filled with slabs or brush 
and ballasted with stone. The pier repairs were to the portions above 
water surface. (Annual Report for 1866, p. Ill, and for 1876, p. 
520.) The repairs were made and the 200-foot extension to the south 
pier was completed in 1868. 

In 1867 the Chief of Engineers (Annual Report for 1867, p. 24) 
recommended the extension of the south pier 700 feet, at an estimated 
cost of $77,000. This project was adopted by the river and harbor 
act approved July 11, 1870, which appropriated $15,000. Under this 
project an extension of 416 feet to the south pier was completed in 
1871, making its total length 819 feet, the north pier being 1,070 feet 
long at this time. 

The river and harbor act approved March 3, 1875, amended the 
project to include an extension of the north pier 400 feet in a direc- 
tion north 78° west, at an estimated cost of $42,215.47; also for a 
wing dam on the north side, at the mouth of Paw Paw River. (H. 
Ex. Doc. No. 160, 43d Cong., 2d sess., and Annual Report for 1875, 
pp. 6 and 28.) 

In 1875, 528 feet of wing dam was constructed in the river, to 
deflect the current and deepen the channel to the mouth of the Benton 
Harbor Canal, to which dam a row of piles was added in 1876, pro- 
longing the dam 194 feet. The cost was $9,046.24. (Annual Report 
for 1876, p. 103.) The north pier was extended 300 feet in 1875, 50 
feet in 1879, and 100 feet in 1880 and 1881. 

The project was amended by the river and harbor act approved 
June 14, 1880, to include the channel leading up to the city of Benton 
Harbor. The work proposed was: To dredge the canal to a depth of 
12 feet for a width of 80 feet; to revet the north bank a distance of 
about 3,000 feet; all at an estimated cost of $20,000. (Annual Re- 
port for 1880, pp. 2030, 2031, and 2049 to 2055.) 

The width of the canal was increased to 100 feet hj the river and 
harbor act approved August 2, 1882. (Annual Report for 1882, p. 
2320.) 

In 1889 the north pier was secured by connection to the shore by 
pilework filled with brush. 

The river and harbor act approved July 13, 1892, adopted a project 
which provided for rebuilding 373 feet of north pier crib work, for 
refilling north revetment, minor repairs, repairing wing wall, and 
additional dredging, all at an estimated cost of $25,000; also for ex- 
tension of the north pier 1,200 feet at an estimated cost of $120,000; 
a total of $145,000. This made the original estimated cost, as here 
revised, $519,113. (Annual Report for 1892, p. 2358, 2360, and 2362- 
2363.) The object sought by this project was an entrance channel 
270 feet wide and 16 feet deep, the extension of the same depth in the 
harbor, and an interior navigation 13 feet deep from there to Benton 
Harbor, nearly 1 mile above. (Annual Report for 1894, p. 339.) In 
December, 1892, a contract was entered into for extending the north 
pier 350 feet (Annual Report for 1893, p. 369), which was accom- 



APPENDIX. 1947 

plished in 1893. The remaining 850 feet was not built under this 
project. 

June 30, 1891, the north pier and revetment was 2,013.5 feet long, 
and projected 1,300 feet beyond the shore line. It comprised 831.5 
feet of pile work and 1,182 feet of crib work. The south pier was 
819 feet long, projecting 550 feet beyond the shore line. The actual 
channel depths at this time were generally 14 io 15 feet. 

2. SOUTH HAVEN HARBOR, MICH. 

The original project provided for two parallel piers 120 feet apart, 
in a direction south 84° 30' west from the mouth of the river, into 
12 feet of water in the lake, the north pier to be a prolongation of the 
existing north pier, as follows: Extension of north pier 512 feet 
and of south pier 576 feet, 1,088 feet of pier work; 780 feet of sheet 
piling to protect the river banks; dredging 38,224 cubic yards from 
between the piers 120 apart, and in widening the river; dredging 
2,000 cubic yards on the outer bar; removing the existing south pier; 
all at an estimated cost of $128,288.4'i. This project was adopted 
by the river and harbor act approved March 2, 1867. (Annual Re- 
port for 1866, p. 149 to 153.) 

By June 30, 1876, 1,102 feet of crio work and 525 feet of pile work 
was constructed. The depths maintained were generally about 8 or 
9 feet. (Annual Report for 1876, p. 512.) By June 30, 1877, the 
project was completed except that the minimum channel depths were 
still about 8£ feet. (Annual Report for 1879, p. 1628.) The depth 
of 12 feet was secured by 1880. 

The project was modified by the river and harbor act approved 
June 14, 1880, to provide for an entrance channel not less than 14 
feet depth, datum not stated. (Annual Report for 1880, p. 218.) 

The project was modified by the river and harbor act approved 
August 2, 1882, which provided " $3,000 for removing obstructions in 
and dredging channel of river to railroad bridge." There being no 
railroad bridge, this modification was reenacted by the river and 
harbor act approved August 11, 1888, which provided that $3,000 
" shall be used in deepening the channel of Black River from the 
inner termini of the piers to the highway bridge." The bridge is 
correctly referred to as " highway bridge " in the latter act. 

3. SAUGATUCK HARBOR AND KALAMAZOO RIVER, MICH. 

The original project provided for improving the entrance as it 
existed in July, 1867, by extending the south pier 416 feet, to the 
depth of 12 feet of water, and the north pier 1,632 feet, also to a depth 
of 12 feet, these piers to be parallel to each other, and 200 feet 
apart; by dredging between the piers to a depth of 12 feet (datum 
not stated) ; also by cutting a channel in the bay 200 feet wide and 
12 feet deep, to connect with the deep water near the first bend; all 
at an estimated cost of $203,295.80. This project was adopted by the 
river and harbor act approved July 25, 1868. (Annual Report for 
1867, p. 130 to 132, and for 1876, p. 509.) 

No Government improvement had been undertaken up to July 23, 
1869, when a board of engineers recommended a modification of the 



1948 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

projects, to protect the river banks inside of the existing piers, as 
follows: To revet the left or south bank at the bend, then continue 
that revetment to the east end of the south pier, a total length of 
2,700 feet, at an estimated cost of $27,097.58; to build 1,660 feet of 
revetment on the north side of the river to the lake shore line, 770 
feet of close piling from the shore line to the inner end of the pro- 
posed north pier cribwork, 192 feet of cribwork in extension of the 
north pier, and dredge 60,740 cubic yards, a total for the north side 
and for dredging of $59,300.98; total for the project, $86,398.56. 
The appropriations of July 25, 1868, and of April 10, 1869. were 
applied to the construction of a south revetment. The project was 
adopted by the river and harbor act approved July 11, 1870. (An- 
nual Report for 1869, p. 99 to 101 ; 1874, p. 190 ; and 1876, p. 509 and 
510.) 

Construction under the project was carried on quite vigorously 
up to 1876 and again in 1880 and 1881. By that time the works on 
the north side consisted of a pile pier and revetment 715 feet long, 
and beginning about 1,750 feet upstream, a pile revetment at the 
bend 1,193 feet long; those on the south side consisted of a pile pier 
286 feet long and a pile revetment 3,577 feet long. The width be- 
tween the entrance piers was 228 feet. No further new work was 
built under this project. 

Under date of June 28, 1882, a Board of Engineers on Saugatuck 
Harbor submitted a report as a result of which the river and harbor 
act approved August 2, 1882, adopted a project for the maintenance 
of this harbor at the existing depth, i. e., 8 feet. (Annual Report 
for 1883, p. 1829.) An uncertain channel with a depth of from 4 to 
8 feet was maintained. 

To June 30, 1906, there had been expended $207,785.92, of which 
$90,231.99 was for construction and $117,553.93 for maintenance. 

4. HOLLAND HARBOR, MICH. 

The river and harbor act approved August 30, 1852, appropriated 
$8,000, thereby adopting a project to make a cut through the shore 
from Black Lake to Lake Michigan, at an estimated cost of $105,- 
225.78. The results of this expenditure are unknown. 

About 1860 the harbor commissioners of Holland adopted a project 
for cutting a channel into Lake Michigan from Black Lake and by 
1866 had expended $30,000, building a north pier ^125 feet long, a 
south pier 77 feet long, and obtaining a channel 175 feet wide and 
5| feet deep. The river and harbor act approved June 23. 1866, 
appropriated $55,615.31, which was expended on the project adopted 
by the river and harbor act approved March 2, 1867. This provided 
for extending the existing north pier about 250 feet and the south 
pier about 275 feet to bring them into 12 feet of water ; to close pile 
the entrance into Black Lake for 1,125 feet on the north side, and 
425 feet on the south side to reach the 12-foot curve, to dredge 80,000 
cubic yards from the channel : all at an estimated cost of $106,238.04. 
(Annual Report for 1866, p. 106 to 109.) 

The following table shows the length and time of construction of 
the revetments and piers under this project with its various modi- 
fications. All cribwork is in extension toward Lake Michigan, of 



APPENDIX. 



1949 



the piers, except 47 feet on north pier and 64 feet on south pier, both 
constructed in 1868, which were built toward shore: 





North shore. 


Year. 


South shore. 


Year. 


Crib- 
work. 


Revet- 
ment. 


Crib- 
work. 


Revet- 
ment. 




125 
47 

258 






77 
64 
298 




1868 




1868 




lst)S-ti9 




1S68-70 




1S70 


607 


1870 


150 


1871 


32 


1871-73 




621 


1872 


321 
209 


1874 




15 


1873 




1874-89 




86 




15-1 
101 


1875 . 


100 
53 
51 
55 




1880 




1876 














1880 






18S9 


121 




Total 






Total 


717 


1,137 


698 


993 


Grand total, north side. . 


1,8 


54 


Grand total, south side. 


1,691 



This work secured a channel from Black Lake to Lake Michigan 
from 8 to 9 feet below low water, deepened by occasional dredging to 
12 and 13 feet. 

6. GRAND RIVER, MICH. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act ap- 
proved March 3, 1881, which appropriated $10,000 for " improving 
Grand River from its mouth to the city of Grand Rapids, Mich." 
The project provided " for dredging, where needed, a channel 100 
feet wide and 4 feet deep, low stage from Grand Rapids to deep 
water." (Annual Report for 1881, p. 2224 to 2230.) Between 1881 
and 1886 $50,000 was expended in dredging narrow channels across 
the bars to a depth of 4 feet. 

The river and harbor act approved June 3, 1896, adopted a project 
for a channel 100 feet wide and 10 feet deep below standard low 
water of 1889 from Grand Rapids to Grand Haven, requiring the 
removal of 4,000,000 cubic yards; for enlargement of channel at 
Grand Rapids to form a turning basin, requiring the removal of 
70,000 cubic yards ; for wing dams and training dikes, if found neces- 
sary; all at an estimated cost of $670,500. (H. Doc. No. 197, 52d 
Cong., 1st sess.) 

The project was amended by the river and harbor act approved 
June 13, 1902, which provided for extending the improvement as far 
north as Fulton Street, in Grand Rapids, an extension of about one- 
half mile, and the estimated cost was increased from $670,500 to 
$774,000. (Annual Report for 1903, p. 510.) 

To June 30, 1887, there had been expended the sum of $50,000. 

There was expended to October 1, 1903 : 

For dredging . $76, 058. 41 

For training walls '. 74, 512. 66 

For plant then available for prosecuting work 21, 220. 33 

171, 791. 40 



1950 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 
7. MUSKEGON HARBOR, MICH. 

The original project adopted by the river and harbor act approved 
March 2, 1867, provided for extending both of the existing piers, 
commencing at their outer ends, on a line parallel to the inner face 
of the south pier to 17 feet of water, requiring 700 feet of pier work, 
at an estimated cost of $58,450. (Annual Report for 1866, p. 146; 
and for 1867, p. 110.) 

The project was amended by the river and harbor act approved 
June 10, 1872, to include reconstructing 350 feet of south slab pier 
and 250 feet of north slab pier into pile piers. (Annual Report for 
1873, pp. 38 and 271.) 

The project was amended by the river and harbor act approved 
June 23, 1874, to provide for an extension of the south pier 400 feet 
to 18 feet of water, at an estimated cost of $56,000. (Annual Re- 
port for 1873, p. 271; and for 1874, p. 183.) 

The project was modified by the river and harbor act approved 
August 2, 1882, in accordance with a plan submitted by a board of 
engineers in April, 1881, which provided for increasing the width 
of entrance from about 186 feet to 300 feet by constructing a de- 
tached section in extension of the north pier 300 feet north of the 
south pier. (Annual Report for 1881, p. 2217; for 1884, p. 1984.) 

A special report of December 23, 1889, recommended the removal 
of the outer 315 feet of the old north pier, constructing 326 feet of new 
work to connect the inner end of the detached north pier with the 
resulting outer end of the old north pier, all at an estimated cost 
of $34,000. (Annual Report for 1890, pp. 2644-2646.) This modifi- 
cation of the project was adopted by the river and harbor act ap- 
proved September 19, 1890. 

A special report of January 25, 1892, recommended 1,600 feet of 
pier extension, 800 feet to each pier, to the 20-foot contour (below 
mean lake level, 1860-1875) in Lake Michigan to create and protect 
a clear 15-foot navigation; dredging the channel from lake to lake 
75 feet wide and 18 feet deep below mean lake level; 5,600 feet of 
revetment for unprotected banks ; all at an estimated cost of $260,000. 
(Annual Report for 1892, pp. 325, 2338-2340; for 1894, p. 345.) 
This modification of the project was adopted by the river and harbor 
act approved August 18, 1894. 

The project was amended by the river and harbor act approved 
March 3, 1899, which appropriated $60,000 and provided: "That 
any portion of the above sum may be used at the discretion of the 
Secretary of War, in sheet piling or otherwise, to prevent erosion 
and preserve the channel at any point where it may be necessary 
between Lake Michigan and Muskegon Lake." 

Under the above project and its modifications there was constructed 
a north pier and revetment 2,780 feet long, and a south pier and 
revetment 2,090 feet long, protecting a channel with an entrance 
width of 308 feet narrowing to 167 feet inside, and with the project 
depth of 15 feet at low water. To June 30, 1902, there had been 
expended $526,293.36, of which $388,218.42 was for construction and 
$138,074.94 for maintenance. (Annual Report for 1902, p. 467.) 



APPENDIX. 1951 

9. LUDINGTON HARBOR, MICH. 

The project originally adopted by Congress (river and harbor act 
approved Mar. 2, 1867) for the improvement of this harbor was to 
build a south pier, commencing at a point 20 feet south of the exist- 
ing slab pier, extending into Lake Michigan 640 feet ; to build a north 
pier in extension of the existing (1867) pier 450 feet long; to re- 
move the old slab pier on south side and cut down slab work on 
north side, replacing it by timber superstructure; to close pile the 
south side and to dredge to a depth of 12 feet if necessary. The 
direction of the piers was north 3° west, the channel width 200 feet, 
the depth 12 feet (datum not stated), and the estimated cost $270,682. 
(Annual Report for 1867, p. 114; for 1874, p. 178; and for 1876, 
p. 474.) 

In 1875 it was stated that a channel with 14 feet depth of water 
was required to provide for the necessities of trade, and to obtain 
and maintain such a depth an extension of 150 feet to each pier was 
recommended at an estimated cost of $36,000. (Annual Report for 
1875, p.jL7; and for 1879, p. 1607.) 

In 1879 the length of piers as above recommended had been reached, 
but the depth of water required by vessels seeking to use the port 
was 16 feet, and a further extension of the piers was recommended. 
The original estimated cost, as amended in 1879, was $213,787.07. 
(Annual Report for 1879, p. 1607.) 

A report on a harbor of refuge was made under date of March 7, 
1882, which recommended an exterior breakwater. (Annual Report 
for 1882, p. 2293.) A second report with plan and estimate for a 
harbor of refuge was submitted under date of October 27, 1883. This 
report submitted two plans, the first for an exterior harbor, with 
detached breakwater, at an estimated cost of $861,260, and the second 
for widening the entrance to 400 feet. 

The second plan provided for widening the existing channel be- 
tween Lake Michigan and Pere Marquette Lake to 400 feet by con- 
structing a new south pier 400 feet south of the north pier, remov- 
ing the existing south pier, and dredging the channel to a depth of 
18 feet (datum not stated), all at an estimated cost of $419,185.20. 
The second plan was approved by the Chief of Engineers January 6, 
1885, and was adopted by the river and harbor act approved August 
5, 1886. (Annual Report for 1884, p. 1999, and for 1885, pp. 317, 
2073, and 2090-2094.) 

The Annual Report for 1888, page 1906, states: 

The work of carrying out the present project has been delayed by the fact 
that no authority existed for the acceptance by the United States of a strip of 
land needed for the widening of the channel. An enabling act was passed by 
Congress, approved April 24, 1888, authorizing the acceptance by the United 
States of the above-mentioned strip of land, which the Pere Marquette Lumber 
Co. has offered to donate. Negotiations are now in process for the transfer of 
this land to the United States, and as soon as it shall have been effected, work 
will be commenced on the present project with the funds available. 

By deed of June 13, 188S, the land required for widening the harbor 
was donated to the United States. This deed conveyed a strip of 
land about 224 feet wide south of and adjoining the south revetment, 
and extending from lake to lake, a distance at that time of about 666 
feet, and conveying riparian rights on each lake. The river and 



1952 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, TJ. S. ARMY. 

harbor act approved August 11, 1888, authorized and directed the 
Secretary of War to accept the deed, tendered by the Pere Marquette 
Lumber Co., of 3.31 acres of land. 

In a special report, dated December 31, 1889, it was recommended 
that the project be modified so as to retain the south pier and to pro- 
long it 700 feet, at an estimated total cost of the project of $325,000 
in place of $419,185.20. This was approved by the Chief of Engineers 
under date of January 9, 1890, and transmitted to Congress by the 
Secretary of War, with his approval, under date of January 11, 
1890. (Annual Keport, for 1890, pp. 2634-2631.) The construction 
of the piers to their full length, by the extension of the north pier 
500 feet and the south pier 700 feet, was completed in November, 
1890, the north pier having a length of 1,450 feet and the south pier 
2,300 feet; the entrance width was 250 feet, narrowing to 200 feet at 
the shore line. (Annual Eeport for 1891, pp. 338 and 2682.) _ 

A special report of January 2, 1897, submitted a new project for 
improving the harbor so as to maintain a channel 18 feet deep at 
the existing water level of Lake Michigan, which was 2 feet below 
mean lake level, 1860 to 1875. This project provided for 700 feet 
extension to the north pier and 300 feet to the south pier; for dredg- 
ing 60,000 cubic yards; for reconstructing 1,600 feet of piers; for 
repairs to 567 feet of pile revetment, south pier; for minor repairs 
to the remaining piers; all at an estimated cost of $210,000. This 
project was adopted by the river and harbor act approved March 3, 
1899 (in accordance with the report and plan submitted in H. Doc. 
No. 273, 54th Cong., 2d sess; see also Annual Report for 1897, pp. 
2951-2953). 

In its final form as adopted March 3, 1899, the project provided 
for a through channel 183 to 285 feet wide and 18 feet deep below 
low water, protected by the requisite piers and revetments. The de- 
velopment of the harbor was progressive, the changes in the original 
project affecting only the length and direction of the piers and the 
depth between them. 

The total amount expended upon the original and modified proj- 
ects was $617,867.72, of which $491,416.22 was for construction and 
$126,451.50 for maintenance. 

10. MANISTEE HARBOR, MICH. 

Before improvement was begun by the United States the entrance 
from Lake Michigan had been improved by local interests by slab 
piers from 100 to 150 feet apart, and the depth was from 7 to 8 feet in 
an uncertain channel obstructed by sand bars. 

The first reference to a project is given in the Annual Report of the 
Chief of Engineers, 1866, page 142. the project there stated providing 
for 1,000 feet of cribwork for each pier, a total of 2,000 feet, at an 
estimated cost of $167,000, and for dredging between the proposed 
piers and for a distance of 350 feet in the river to a depth of 12 feet 
at a cost of $13,949, making a total estimated cost of $180,949. This 
project was adopted by the river and harbor act of March 2. 1867. 
The project as given in Annual Report, 1867, page 115, was to extend 
the existing south pier in the same direction 960 feet; to extend the 
existing north pier 960 feet parallel to the south pier to 12 feet of 
water; to cut off a point of slab work inside the south pier and widen 
the channel; to cut down all slab work to water surface and build 



APPENDIX. 1953 

cribwork superstructure on the old foundation; and to dredge the 
channel to a depth of 12 feet. No datum plane was given. Fourteen 
32-foot cribs had been placed prior to September 1, 1867. A slight 
change of plan was caused by the washing away of the outer 100 feet 
of the existing north pier. 

The Annual Report for 1871, page 136, states that the north side 
of the channel would have to be protected by a pile revetment from 
the east end of the north pier 850 feet inward at a cost of $13,812.50. 
The construction of 600 feet of this revetment was begun in August, 
1872, and completed in May, 1873, with funds from the appropriation 
of June 10, 1872. (Annual Report for 1873, p. 263.) 

The Annual Report for 1872, page 186, states that to carry out the 
adopted harbor design would require the construction of 580 feet 
of revetment on the south side after dredging away the point as 
provided for in the 1867 project. Work on this south revetment was 
begun in July, 1873, with funds from the appropriation of June 10, 
1872. (Annual Report for 1873, p. 263.) 

The Annual Report for 1873, page 263, gives an estimate for pier 
extension to a depth of 16 feet (datum plane not stated), increasing 
the proposed lengths of piers from 960 feet for each pier to 1,288 feet 
for the north pier and 1,387 feet for the south pier. This proposed 
extension, 650 feet to the north pier and 750 feet to the south pier, 
was estimated to cost $112,000. The original project of 1867 did 
not provide for any improvement in the river eastward of the shore 
ends of piers, but in 1873 the scope of operating was extended to in- 
clude straightening the lower portion of the river by dredging and 
for revetting the banks inside of the pier ends. (Annual Report for 
1894, p. 2223.) 

In the Annual Report for 1875, page 246, it was recommended to 
remove the bend at the inner end of the north revetment, extend the 
north revetment 320 feet eastward, and deepen the channel between 
the piers to 12 feet (datum not stated), at a cost of $13,771.40. This 
work was provided for by the appropriation of August 14, 1876, and 
funds remaining from the appropriation of March 3, 1875. (Annual 
Report for 1876, p. 100.) 

The estimate of 1873, $112,000 for pier extension, and the estimate 
of 1875, $13,771 for revetment and for dredging, made a total of 
$125,771, to complete all improvements. (Annual Report for 1876, 
p. 469.) 

The project was again enlarged (Annual Report for 1891, p. 2678) , 
as follows: 

The special report made under date of December 14, 1889 (Annual Report for 
1890, pp. 2618, 2619), having been approved by the Chief of Engineers, consti- 
tuted in effect a new project for Manistee Harbor and was the basis of the 
appropriation of September 19, 1890. The former project was for a 12-foot 
navigation into Manistee River. The later project increases the depth to 15 
feet and extends the channel through to Manistee Lake, a total distance of about 
8,000 feet, making provision for dredging throughout this length and for consid- 
erable extension of the entrance piers into the lake, viz, 11 new cribs, 550 feet, 
on the north pier, and 7 new cribs, 350 feet, on the south pier, to enable them 
to reach the 18-foot contour. 

The 15-foot channel was dredged for a width of 50 feet in the upper 
portion, increased to 75 feet and 100 feet as the entrance was ap- 
proached. 

8373°— eng 1915 123 



1954 KEPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

The river and harbor act of July 13, 1892, which appropriated 
$50,000 for continuing improvement and for repairs of Manistee Har- 
bor, modified the project as follows : 

Provided, That no part of this sum shall be used in aid of the inner naviga- 
tion until the city authorities or private owners have taken proper steps to pre- 
vent erosion of the banks and the washing of silt into the bed of the river. 
(Annual Report for 1S93, p. 2S9S.) 

The river and harbor act approved March 2, 1907, changed the 
project. (H. Doc. No. 511, 59th Cong., 1st sess.) It provided for 
securing a uniform depth of 18 feet at low water from Lake Michi- 
gan to Manistee Lake with a general width of channel of 120 feet, 
widened to 275 feet at the inner end of the north revetment; for 
extending the south pier 300 feet, so that both piers would end at 
the 20-foot contour in Lake Michigan; for 1,225 feet of new revet- 
ment, 825 feet on the south side and 400 feet on the north side ; and 
for 2,250 linear feet of pile protection work along the river. The esti- 
mated cost was $147,488, with $1,500 annually for maintenance after 
completion. The approval of the project was subject to the proviso 
that no work should be undertaken by the United States until local 
authorities reconstructed the bridges as recommended, deeded to the 
United States the land necessary for the proposed widening of the 
river channel, and protected the United States against all claims for 
damages which might result from caving of river banks due to the 
proposed improvement. This project was not carried out as the local 
authorities failed to comply with the conditions. 

The river and harbor act approved June 25, 1910, modified the proj- 
ect by providing for a channel 18 feet deep at the entrance and 16 
feet deep and 90 to 126 feet wide through the river to Manistee Lake 
at an estimated first cost of $25,000, and such amounts for annual 
maintenance as found necessary. The depth were referred to low 
water. (H. Doc. No. 705, 61st Cong., 2d sess.) 

12. ARCADIA HARBOR, MICH. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act 
approved March 3, 1905, for maintenance of a channel not less than 
50 feet wide and 12 feet deep below low water (2 feet below mean 
lake level, 1860-1875) at an annual expense of $3,000 for a period of 
five years. (H. Doc. No. 194, 58th Cong.. 2d sess.. and Annual Report 
for i904, pp. 3037-3048.) The harbor had been built by private inter- 
ests and consisted of a channel between parallel piers extending from 
Bar Lake to Lake Michigan. The five years covered by this project 
were the calendar years 1905 to 1909, inclusive. 

15. PETOSKEY HARBOR, MICH. 

The earliest action of Congress looking to harbor improvement at 
Petoskey was the provision in the river and harbor act of July 5, 
1884, for a survey and examination of Little Traverse Bay. near the 
village of Petoskey, with the view to constructing a harbor of refuge. 
. The report in compliance therewith was unfavorable (H. Doc. No. 
71, 48th Cong., 2d sess.; Annual Report for 1885. p. 2095), but the 
river and harbor act of August 11. 1888. again took up the matter by 
requiring an examination and survey of " Petoskey Harbor, for 



APPENDIX. 1955 

breakwater and harbor of refuge." This resulted in a report, dated 
December 21, 1889 (Annual Report for 1890, p. 2673), which presents 
two projects. The smaller, at an estimated cost of $70,000, contem- 
plated the rebuilding of the landing pier in front of the village and 
extending it into an L or arm to the eastward, so that vessels could 
safely lie in the angle. The larger project, at an estimated cost of 
$170,000, contemplated crib breakwater construction 1,750 feet long 
to protect the landing pier from north and west storms. 

Congress appropriated $15,000 in river and harbor act approved 
September 19, 1890, which was construed to adopt the larger of the 
two projects, but the river and harbor act of July 13, 1892, appro- 
priated additional funds and provided that these funds, as well as 
those previously appropriated, should be used to improve the harbor 
in compliance with the smaller of the two projects. 

No construction work in the field was begun before the present 
project was adopted (river and harbor act of Aug. 18, 1894). 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE DETROIT, MICH., 
DISTRICT. 



2. ST. MARYS RIVER AT THE FALLS, MICH. 

The original improvement by the United States of the section of 
the St. Marys River at the falls was begun under a project author- 
ized by the act of July 11, 1870, which provided for increasing the 
width of the then State Canal to at least 100 feet, replacing the stone 
slope walls with timber revetment piers, building a new lock, and 
providing for 16 feet draft. The project called for a single-chamber 
lock 515 feet long between service gates and 80 feet wide (narrowed 
at gate openings to 60 feet), arranged for 18 feet average lift and 
with a depth over the miter sills of 17 feet at mean stage of water 
then prevailing. This lock (now known as the Weitzel Lock) was 
opened to traffic in 1881. 

The river and harbor act of August 5, 1886, authorized the execu- 
tion of a project for building, on the site of the old State locks, a new 
lock with a single lift of 16 to 21 feet, the chamber being 800 feet 
long by 100 feet wide, with a project depth of 22 feet on the miter 
sills at mean stage of water then prevailing; also for deepening the 
canal and its approaches, all at an estimated cost of $4,738,865. The 
new lock constructed under this project, and known as the Poe Lock, 
was opened to navigation August 3, 1896. Later work consisted in 
completing the deepening of the canal and its approaches, rebuilding 
and extending canal piers, grading and improving canal grounds, etc. 

The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, provided for extending 
the work at the falls so as to include widening and further improve- 
ment of the canal above the locks, in accordance with the project sub- 
mitted in House Document No. 128, Fifty-sixth Congress, second 
session, but made no additional appropriation therefor. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1905, authorized the expendi- 
ture under continuing contract of $1,020,000, all of which has been 



1956 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

appropriated, for widening canal as proposed in project submitted 
in House Document No. 215, Fifty-eighth Congress, third session. 

The project of 1886 and its extensions and modifications, fop 
general improvement, has been completed, giving a canal 1| miles 
long, with widths of 108 to 500 feet and depth of 24.G feet in the 
upper portion, a movable dam for closing the canal in an emergency, 
and a lock 100 feet wide and 800 feet long between service gates. 

The draft which can be carrried through the Wei t /el and Poe 
Locks at present is about 12.6 and 18 feet, respectively, at extreme 
low-water stages of the lower pools, 580.6 feet above mean tide at 
New York. The water level below the locks varies about 1 foot dur- 
ing the year. 

4. HAY LAKE AND NEEBISH CHANNELS, ST. MARYS RIVER, MICH. 

In 1856 the United States entered upon the general improvement 
of the St. Marys Kiver, under authority of act of July 8, 1850. the 
funds appropriated being devoted principally to the channel 14 feet 
deep through Lake George; some work was also done along the 
western bank of the East Neebish Channel and some bowlders were 
removed from the entrances to the canal. This work resulted, by 
1869, in giving a channel from Lake Superior to Lake Huron with 
a depth (about 11| feet) as great as could Ije carried through the 
State canal and locks. 

The act of August 2, 1882. authorized the project for a channel 
300 feet wide, with a least depth of 17 feet, through all obstructed 
portions of the river from the foot of the locks to Lake Huron, by 
way of Hay Lake and the Middle Neebish. This project was modi- 
fied by the act approved August 5. 1886. to provide a depth of 20 
feet and to widen the channel at angles and critical places, at a 
total estimated cost of $2,659,115. The work covered by above 
project as modified was completed prior to beginning work on the 
present project. 

6. CHEBOYGAN HARBOR, MICH. 

The original project for work of improvement at this harbor, 
adopted by act of March 3, 1871. called for a channel 200 feet wide 
and 14 feet deep from the 14-foot contour in the Straits of Mackinac 
to the mouth of the river, its sides to be protected by pile revetment 
and piers. Estimated cost. $395,335. 

Operations under this original project were confined solely to 
dredging, which was carried to a depth of only 13 feet, no revet- 
ment or pier work being done. 

In 1880, with the funds provided by act of June 14. 1^><>. opera- 
tions were begun in accordance with a project which had for its 
object the securing of a 15-foot depth in the channel. The work 
was prosecuted with the funds provided by subsequent appropria- 
tions, and a channel of this depth, having a width of 200 feet, was 
provided from the 15-foot contour in the straits to the State road 
bridge, as well as a turning basis, with clear 15-foot depth in front 
of the steamboat docks. 



APPENDIX. 1957 

S. ALPENA HARBOR (THUNDER BAY RIVER), MICH. 

The original project for the improvement of this harbor, author- 
ized by act of August 14, 1876, contemplated a channel 200 feet wide 
and 13 feet deep from the first bridge to the 13-foot contour in 
Thunder Bay. 

This project was modified in 1882 to increase this depth to 14 feet, 
and a 14-foot depth was secured the following year with the funds 
provided by act of August 2, 1882. 

9. SAGINAW RIVER, MICH. 

The original project for the improvement of this river was author- 
ized by the act of June 23, 1866. It provided for a channel across the 
bar in Saginaw Bay, at the mouth of the river, 12 feet deep and 195 
feet wide across the bottom. This channel was completed in 1869. 

In 1874 (act of June 23, 1874) the project was extended to include 
the improvement of the river above Bay City so as to secure a 10-foot 
channel across the bars at East Saginaw and Carrollton and the con- 
struction of a pile revetment at the latter place. This work was com- 
pleted in 1878. 

In 1878 (act of June 18, 1878) the project was extended to cover the 
construction of a wing dam at Zilwaukee bar, and the dam was built 
that year. 

In 1879 (act of Mar. 3, 1879) the project was still further extended 
to secure a 10-foot channel at New York Works bar and Willow 
Island bar and the construction of a plank beam revetment at the 
latter place. 

In 1882 (act of Aug. 2, 1882) a project was adopted, covering the 
entire river, which provided for a channel 200 feet wide and 14 feet 
deep from Saginaw Bay to Portsmouth Street Bridge in Bay City, 
and thence a channel of same width, 12 feet deep, to the head of the 
river, and the construction of cross dams at Carrollton and Oneida 
Channels, the plane of reference for dredging being 581.1 feet above 
mean tide New York. The estimated cost was $446,000. By the 
river and harbor act of August 5, 1886, the improvement of the west 
channel along West Bay City was added to this project. Work was 
prosecuted under this project up to the time of the adoption of the 
existing project, and a channel of the required depth, but of varying 
widths, was obtained and maintained. 

11. MOUTH OF BLACK RIVER, MICH. 

The original project for this improvement, authorized by act of 
June 10, 1872, contemplated the removal of the bar at the mouth of 
the river and the middle ground in the St. Clair River to a depth of 
15 feet over an area of 46.6 acres. Estimated cost, $67,320. The 
work was begun in 1872 and completed in 1878. 

13. ST. CLAIR FLATS CANAL, MICH. 

The original project for the construction of this canal, authorized 
by the act of March 2, 1867, provided for the construction of a 
straight ship canal at the mouth of the South Pass of the St. Clair 



1958 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, TJ. S. ARMY. 

River through the shoal to deep water in Lake St. Clair, a distance 
of about 14 miles, the canal to be 300 feet wide and 13 feet deep at 
low stage of water and to be protected by dikes 5 feet high and 58 
feet wide on top, built of the dredged material thrown behind a pile 
and timber revetment. This work was completed at a cost of $461,- 
090.01 and the canal was opened to the public on July 25, 1871. 

In 1873 (act of Mar. 3, 1873) the project was modified so as to 
secure a depth of 16 feet in the canal. The work of deepening was 
begun that year and completed in September, 1874. 

In November, 1886, a general plan was submitted for improving 
the canal, which contemplated driving a double row of sheet piling to 
a depth of 26 feet along the channel face of each dike, dredging the 
channel to a depth of 20 feet, continuing this channel above and 
below the canal to the same depth in the river and lake, and rebuild- 
ing the wooden superstructure. This plan was approved and the 
funds provided by the acts of August 5, 1886, and August 11, 1888, 
were devoted to the work on the dikes, no work of dredging being 
done until after the approval of the act of September 19, 1890. when 
a contract for deepening the channel to 18 feet was entered into. 
This contract was completed in July, 1892. 

14. CLINTON RIVER, MICH. 

The original project for the improvement of this river was author- 
ized by act of August 30. 1852, and provided for the improvement of 
the mouth of the river. Its scope is not known. 

In 1870 (act of July 11. 1870) a project was adopted for dredging 
a channel 100 feet wide, 8 feet deep, and 2,700 feet long nearly straight 
out from the mouth of the river. This channel was secured that 
same year. 

In 1880 a board of engineer officers submitted a plan, which was 
later approved, for a cut 8 feet deep and 60 feet wide at the entrance 
to the river, the dredged material to be used to form banks, these 
banks to be protected by planting them with willow or wild rice. 
Work was prosecuted under this plan, but the results were not en- 
tirely satisfactory and the existing project was adopted. 

16. DETROIT RIVER, MICH. 

The original project for the improvement of the Detroit River 
was authorized by act of June 23, 1874. It provided for a channel 
at the Limekiln Crossing at least 20 feet in depth, about 3.000 feet 
in length, and 300 feet in width, conforming with the natural course 
of the river. Estimated cost, $1,166,500. Work was begun in ls7<i 
and continued until 1883. In 1884 (act of July 5. L884) this project 
was modified so as to secure a straight channel of the same width 
and depth, and the estimated cost was increased by $40,000. The 
300-foot channel proving too narrow for safe navigation, the 
project was further modified and the width increased to 400 feet in 
1886 (act of Aug. 5, 1886). The estimated cost of this addition was 
$168,000. In expending the funds provided by the act of July 31. 
1888, the channel was further widened 40 feet. The work was com- 



APPENDIX. 1959 

pleted in 1890, and the project channel at the Limekiln Crossing 
secured at a total cost of $702,122.04. 

In 1892 the project was modified and extended to provide for the 
removal of obstructive shoals between the city of Detroit and Lake 
Erie, with a view to obtaining a channel with a least width of 600 
feet and a navigable depth of 20 feet, adopted by acts of July 13, 
1892, and March 3, 1899. The estimated cost of this additional work 
was 180,000, making the total estimated cost of the channel 
$1,554,500, and this amount was appropriated and expended prior 
to beginning operations under the present project. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE CLEVELAND, 
OHIO, DISTRICT. 



1. TOLEDO HARBOR, OHIO. 

The first appropriation for improvement, made by the river and 
harbor act of June 23, 1866, was applied to increasing the depth and 
width of the natural channel through Maumee Bay, which was about 
7^ miles long. An effort was made to obtain a channel 12 feet deep. 

In 1872 the Secretary of War approved a project "to improve the 
existing natural channel through Maumee Bay by widening it to 250 
feet at the surface and 200 feet at the bottom, with a depth of 15 
feet." (Annual Eeport of the Chief of Engineers, 1873, p. 313.) 
In 1880 a channel 200 to 250 feet wide was available to the docks at 
Toledo. By the river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, the project 
depth was made 16 feet. 

By the act of July 5, 1884, a project was adopted " for extending 
Maumee River on a straight line through the bay and North Cape 
Point to Lake Erie, confining the river bed in a new channel of about 
the same dimensions as its natural bed." This provision was modified 
by the river and harbor act of August 5, 1886, which provided for 
continuing improvement of Maumee River "by a straight channel 
along such line as may be approved by the Secretary of War." Under 
this authority the Secretary of War adopted, April 27, 1887, the proj- 
ect recommended by the Board of Engineers that the straight chan- 
nel "be obtained by extending the Crib Reach, so called, of the 
present natural channel outward into Lake Erie and inward across 
the bay to the present natural channel of the Maumee River." (An- 
nual Report of the Chief of Engineers, 1887, p. 2297.) The project 
was for a channel 200 feet wide and 17 feet deep, with a total length 
of 7-| miles from the mouth of the Maumee River to curve of 17 feet 
depth in the lake. 

The river and harbor acts of July 13, 1892, August 18, 1894, and 
June 3, 1896, authorized extending the improvements up the Maumee 
River. Under these authorities channels 400 feet wide and 18 feet 
deep over two shoals, known as " The Crossing " and the " Lake Shore 
Shoal," each about 4,000 feet long, were dred-ed. In 1897 the 
" Straight Channel " had been completed to full width of 200 feet 
and a depth of 17 feet at average low water. 



1960 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, IT. S. ARMY. 
3. SANDUSKY HARBOR, OHIO. 

The first appropriation was made for a survey by the river and 
harbor act of May 20, 1826, and the first appropriation for improve- 
ment was made by river and harbor act of June 11, 1844, providing 
funds " to be expended by the Secretary of War and according to 
such plan of improvement as may be recommended by him." Avail- 
able funds were expended for constructing a dam of crib work about 
1,350 feet long, partially closing a breach across Sand Point, which 
was a long, sandy peninsula extending from the north shore of San- 
dusky Buy toward Cedar Point. The object of the work was to con- 
fine the scour to the main channel. 

In 1853-54 additional cribwork about 3,350 feet long was built on 
Sand Point, but in 1859 this was almost entirely destroyed, and in 
1864 the greater part of Sand Point had been washed away. The ap- 
propriations made by river and harbor acts of June 23, 1866, to July 
11, 1872, inclusive, were expended for dredging a channel 400 feet 
wide and 12 feet deep through the outer bar, and a channel 90 feet 
wide and 12 feet deep through the inner bar. The appropriation 
made by river and harbor act of March 3, 1873, was expended for 
dredging a channel through the outer and inner bars 14 feet in depth 
to the area included by the curve of 12 feet depth in the bay. (For 
report on survey, see Annual Report, Chief of Engineers, 1873, p. 
328.) 

In 1877 an extension of the project was approved to provide for 
completing a channel 200 feet wide and 15 feet deep at low water up 
to the city docks. 

In 1878 a cut 150 feet wide and 14 feet deep at average low water 
had been dredged from the curve of 12 feet depth in the bay to the 
curve of 15 feet depth in the lake along the natural or " west channel," 
a distance of about 4^ miles. 

In 1880 dredging a channel 100 feet wide, 15 feet deep, and parallel 
with the docks at a distance of 50 feet was authorized. In 1881 the 
channel had been dredged 100 to 200 feet wide and 15 feet deep 
through the outer bar and up to within 100 feet of the docks. This 
work was completed in 1883. 

The river and harbor act of July 5, 1884, provided for " deepening 
the channel." It had been recommended that the channel depth be 
made 16 feet. 

The river and harbor act of August 11, 1888, provided for mainte- 
nance of the old channel and for dredging " a straight channel from 
Sandusky City to the entrance of Sandusky Bay." The estimated 
cost of a channel 200 feet wide and 17 feet deep at low water from 
the north end of Cedar Point to the east end of the then existing 
channel in front of the city, a distance of about 1|- miles, was $96,712. 
(Annual Report, Chief of Engineers, 1888, p. 1991.) 

The " straight channel " was completed in 1894 at a cost of si L2,98 [. 
and in 1895 a depth of 18 feet was provided over the outer bar and a 
depth of 17 feet was provided in the dock channel. The appropria- 
tion made b} 7 the river and harbor act of August 18, 1894. was ap- 
plied to a project for dredging a channel 300 feet wide and 18 feet 
deep over the outer bar; for the construction of a jetty 2,500 feet long, 
starting at Cedar Point and extending to the eastward of this outer 



APPENDIX. 1961 

channel; for the construction of a dike 2,500 feet long to the west- 
ward of the outer channel ; for dredging the straight channel slopes 
and widening at both ends ; and for dredging the dock channel for a 
length of 6,500 feet to a width of 200 feet and a depth of 17 feet, all 
at an estimated cost of $255,000. (H. Doc. No. 91, 53d Cong., 3d 
sess., and Annual Keport, Chief of Engineers, 1891, p. 3085.) 

4. HURON HARBOR, OHIO. 

The first appropriation for the improvement of this harbor was 
made by the river and harbor act of May 20, 1826, "to remove ob- 
structions in Huron Kiver." At that time the mouth of the river 
was closed by a sand bar which was bare at low water. In order to 
maintain a channel the river mouth was confined between piers, 
which, in 1833, were 170 feet apart at the inner end and 140 feet at 
the outer end and extended into the lake about 1,000 feet. The 
depth in the channel between the piers was 10 feet. 

No appropriations were made during the years 1853-1865, in- 
clusive, and at the end of that period extensive dredging and repairs 
to piers were required. 

In 1871 a depth of 15 feet was obtained by dredging. 

The river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, provided for 
amending the project " to give 16-foot depth at low water." This 
result was accomplished by dredging and by extending the piers to 
the curve of 16-foot depth in the lake. Under this same act (Sept. 
19, 1890) the work of the United States was supplemented by dredg- 
ing by the Wheeling & Lake Erie Railroad Co. From 1890 to 
1903 a depth of 19 feet was available from the inner end of the 
piers to deep water in the lake. 

6. LORAIN HARBOR, OHIO. 

By the river and harbor act approved May 23, 1828, Congress 
made an appropriation for the construction of piers or other works 
at the mouth of Black River for the purpose of causing sufficient scour 
to maintain a navigable channel across the bar, on which the depth 
at that time did not exceed 3 feet at ordinary lake level. The piers 
were originally 170 to 210 feet apart. 

In 1839 the piers were about 1,200 feet long, but owing to the ad- 
vance of the shore line on each side of the channel they extended into 
the lake only about 800 feet beyond the new shore line. The pre- 
vailing depth in the channel was 9^ feet, but increased to 14 feet near 
the outer end of the piers. 

During the years 1853-1864, inclusive, no funds were available for 
improvement. The piers, especially the east pier, were very badly 
damaged, and only a narrow channel, with a depth of from 7 to 
10 feet, remained near the west pier. 

The piers were repaired in 1865 and 1866, and the channel at once 
began to improve. The piers were gradually extended into the lake 
to prevent drift of sand around their outer ends and into the en- 
trance channel. 

In 1875 the piers extended to the curve of 15-foot depth in the lake, 
and a channel depth of 14 feet at low stage of the lake was secured. 



1962 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

In 1879 the channel was 15 feet deep across the outer bar, 15 to 17 
feet deep betweeen the piers, and 17 to 20 feet deep from the inner 
end of the piers to the Erie Avenue Bridge. 

In 1880 the project was modified to extend the piers to the curve 
of 16-foot depth in the lake, the object being to obtain a channel 16 
feet deep at mean lake level. 

In 1881 a sheet-pile revetment 400 feet long was built upstream 
from the inner end of the east jetty to prevent cutting of bank by 
the river when at flood stage. 

In 1884 a channel with a least depth of 16£ feet was provided. 
Under act approved July 13, 1892, authority was given for extending 
the piers to the curve of 17-foot depth in the lake and obtaining a 
depth of 17 feet at mean lake level in the harbor. This depth was 
secured in 1896 and was increased to 18^ feet in 1898. 

7. CLEVELAND HARBOR, OHIO. 

The project adopted March 3, 1825, provided for parallel piers at 
the mouth of the Cuyahoga River, contracting the channel to a width 
of 200 feet, and extending out to the curve of 12 feet depth in the 
lake, the object being to obtain a channel 12 feet deep by scour. The 
piers were located so as to make a more direct outlet for the river, 
and the old outlet was closed by a dam. This project was com- 
pleted in 1852. At that time the east pier was 1,400 feet long, the 
west pier 1,800 feet long, and there was a channel 200 feet wide and 
13 feet deep. 

The act of June 23, 1866, authorized the extension of the west pier 
500 feet and the east pier 575 feet, and dredging the channel to a 
depth of 14 feet. This work was completed in 1875. 

The project adopted March 3, 1875, provided for the construction 
of a breakwater in 5 fathoms of water to protect the commerce of 
Cleveland, in accordance with which the Secretary of War. on June 
26, 1875, approved a plan for an outer harbor which, as later modi- 
fied provided for a pile pier starting from a point on the shore about 
700 feet west of the extremity of the old bed of the Cuyahoga River, 
5,400 feet west of the west pier, extending into the lake on a line 
running about north 10° west (actually constructed on the magnetic 
meridian) to the 14-foot curve, a distance of 1,000 feet; thence con- 
tinuing a farther distance of 2,130 feet to the 30-foot contour as a 
stone-filled timber crib breakwater on a rubblestone foundation ; 
thence generally parallel with the shore and following the 30-foot 
contour a distance of 4,000 feet as a stone-filled crib breakwater on a 
rubblestone foundation to a point nearly in prolongation of the west 
channel pier of Cuyahoga River, which was to be extended to such 
a point as to leave a 300-foot opening into the outer harbor. (An- 
nual Report Chief of Engineers, 1875, p. 304.) The estimated cost 
was $1,800,000. (Annual Report Chief of Engineers, 1876, p. 568.) 
This was modified in 1882 by providing for extending the east pier, 
instead of the west, and constructing a spur pier 100 feet long on the 
lake side of the breakwater 200 feet from its easterly extremity. 
(Annual Report Chief of Engineers, 1882, p. 2399.) Work under 
this project, except extension of east pier, was completed in 1883, at 
a cost of $800,000. 



APPENDIX. 1963 

The act of August 5, 1886, adopted the following project for an east 
breakwater to form additional outer harbor east of the main entrance : 

Beginning at a point on the prolongation of the lake arm of the 
west breakwater and 500 feet from it and extending eastward on this 
line 1,100 feet; then inclining to the shore and extending 2,400 feet 
in a depth of 25 feet of water, and having between its eastern end 
and the curve of 11 feet depth an entrance 1,200 feet wide. (Annual 
Report, Chief of Engineers, 1885, p. 2228.) This project was modi- 
fied by the act of August 11, 1888, by extending the lake arm of the 
east breakwater to a total length of 3,500 feet ; then inclining toward 
the shore on a line parallel with the then projected breakwater for 
a distance of 2,000 feet. In 1893, 2,500 feet of the east breakwater 
had been completed. In 1895, an opening 200 feet wide and 13 feet 
deep was made in the shore arm of the west breakwater by authority 
of the Secretary of War. 

8. FAIRPORT HARBOR, OHIO. 

The river and harbor acts of March 3, 1825, and May 20, 1826, pro- 
vided, respectively, for " completing the pier at the mouth of Grand 
River " and " removing obstructions at the mouth of Grand River." 
Under the general provisions of these laws the improvement of the 
harbor, as undertaken, consisted in the construction of parallel 
jetties at the mouth of the river located 200 feet apart and extending 
into the lake to a depth of 16 feet below mean lake level. With the 
advance of the shore line the jetties were extended from time to time 
until the west jetty attained a length of 2,370 feet, and the east jetty 
1,765 feet, from the original shore line. The depths obtained in 
the channel were 7£ feet in 1829, 11 feet in 1839, and 12 feet in 1853. 
In 1865 the channel had shoaled to 5 feet. In 1870 the depth was 12 
feet, and in 1879, 14 feet. 

In 1890 the project was modified to provide for extension of jetties 
to a depth of 18 feet in the lake and for maintaining the same depth 
in the jettied channel. (Annual Report for 1890, p. 2782.) These 
jetties have been repeatedly repaired and rebuilt as necessities re- 
quired, and the channel has been deepened and dredged many times. 

9. ASHTABULA HARBOR, OHIO. 

The original project for the improvement of Ashtabula Harbor 
was inaugurated by the river and harbor act of May 20, 1826, which 
provided for the removal of obstructions at the mouth of Ashtabula 
Creek. Under this authority the plan of improvement determined 
upon consisted in the construction of two piers at the mouth of the 
river extending outward to a depth of 10 feet below mean lake level 
in the lake. The piers were located 160 feet apart at their inner 
ends, converging until they were 100 feet apart, 900 feet from shore, 
then widening to 160 feet in the next 200 feet, and parallel from this 
point outward. With funds appropriated from time to time after 
the inauguration of the project the piers were extended and repaired, 
and dredging, including the removal of rock, was carried on until in 
1874 a channel depth of 14 feet below mean lake level had been 
obtained. « 



1964 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, TJ. S. ARMY. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1881, provided for securing a 
channel 16 feet deep below mean lake level. Under this authority 
1,100 linear feet of the inner end of the west pier was rebuilt and 
relocated to provide a channel uniformly 160 feet wide, and the depth 
was increased to 16 feet. 

A project approved July 8, 1890, by the Secretary of War. pro- 
vided for increasing the depth of the channel between the pieis to 
20 feet below mean lake level and for extending the piers to 22 feet 
depth in the lake. (Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers, 1890, 
p. 2785.) 

January 31, 1891, the Secretary of War approved an extension of 
this project to provide for moving the east pier 45 feet east, making 
the distance between piers 213 feet. (Annual Report of the Chief 
of Engineers, 1891, p. 2864.) 

In 1890-91 a portion of the inner end of east pier was removed by 
the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railroad under permit from 
the Secretary of War to provide entrance to their slip. 

The Secretary of War on October 14, 1895, approved an extension 
of the project for deepening the channel to 20 feet below mean lake 
level to include that portion of the river below the highway bridge. 
(Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers, 1890. p. 2061.) ' In ls'.>7 
the project depth of 20 feet below mean lake level had been obtained 
in the channel between the piers and as far as the county bridge, and 
the distance between piers was 213 feet. 

10. CONNEAUT HARBOR, OHIO. 

The original project, for which the first appropriation was imde 
by the river and harbor act of March 2, 1829, provided for a new and 
more direct outlet for Conneaut River about 100 feet wide, protected 
by piers. The original mouth was closed by a dam. thus causing 
increased depth in the new outlet by scour. Some dredging was 
done to provide an inner turning basin. The project was regarded 
as completed in 1871. At that time the east pier was 1.071 feet long. 
the west pier 791 feet long, and the channel between them not less 
than 9 feet deep. A maximum depth of 11 feet was occasionally 
obtained under this project. 

Between 1871 and 1£80 the harbor was kept in repair so far as 
appropriations would permit. No appropriations were made for this 
harbor from 1880 to 1892. At the end of this period the piers were 
in a decayed and dilapidated condition, the channel had rilled with 
sand and silt, and had practically reverted to its original condition. 
The harbor could only be used by small sailing and fishing craft. 

The original project was modified by the river and harbor act of 
July 13, 1892, which provided for relocating the channel eastward of 
original project, constructing two new piers and revetments 200 feet 
apart extending to the curve of 17 feet depth in the lake, and dredg- 
ing the channel 17 feet deep with a bottom width of 160 feet. 
(Scheme B of district engineer's report of Nov. 10, 1891; Annual 
Report of the Chief of Engineers, 1892, p. 2519.) It was found that 
the adopted project would involve a large amount of rock excava- 
tion, and the river and harbor act of February 24. 1893, modified the 
project previously approved to provide for widening and deepening 
the existing channel. (Scheme A of district engineer's report of 



APPENDIX. 1965 

Nov. 10, 1891 ; Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers, 1892, p. 
2518.) The dimensions were the same as those for scheme B. 

A project was adopted by act of March 24, 1896, which provided for 
parallel piers 200 feet apart extending to the curve of 17 feet depth 
in the lake and the construction of two detached breakwaters, the 
outer ends terminating in pierheads 1,200 feet lakeward from the 
pier ends in a depth of about 25 feet of water, located at equal dis- 
tances each side of the axis of the jettied channel and 350 feet apart. 
The breakwaters converged at an angle of 60°, 30° on each side of 
the channel axis. The west breakwater was to be 1,250 feet long 
and east breakwater 1,050 feet long. The project also provided for 
securing a depth of 20 feet below mean lake level in the channel and 
sheltered area. (Annual Report, Chief of Engineers, 1896, p. 2970, 
and H. Doc. No. 325, 54th Cong., 1st sess.) 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE BUFFALO, N. Y., 
DISTRICT. 



1. HARBOR AT ERIE, PA. 

The original improvement was made under provisions of the 
river and harbor act of May 26, 1824. The project provided for clos- 
ing the eastern end of the harbor by a breakwater in which there 
should be an opening 200 feet wide, and for extending to deep water 
in the lake two parallel piers, one on each side of the opening. Pro- 
vision was also made for protection of the beach by brushwood. The 
estimated cost of the project was $39,619.47 and it was completed 
in 1829, the depth in the channel at that time being 7-| to 15 feet. 
About $44,000 was expended in construction and repair work to that 
date. 

Between 1829 and 1855, under appropriation aggregating $170,- 
367.80, the north breakwater was prolonged 1,234 feet, existing struc- 
tures were repaired and rebuilt, and about 4,400 linear feet of crib 
work was built to close a breach which occurred at the neck of the 
peninsula in 1833. A small amount of dredging was also done in 
the channel. 

In 1855 the project was modified, in accordance with the recom- 
mendation of a board of engineers, to extend the north pier to the 
12-foot curve in the lake, to widen the eastern entrance to the harbor 
to 500 feet by removing the old and building a new south pier, to 
construct channel piers to form a western entrance at or near the 
breach in Peninsula Point, and to check the abrasion and restore the 
original water line of the peninsula as far as possible. The estimated 
cost of the project was $269,105.37, but it was not carried out. 

A modification adopted in 1865 provided for the extension of the 
north pier 500 feet into the lake to the 13-foot curve at an estimated 
cost of $15,126.90. This work was completed in 1867, when a fur- 
ther modification was adopted by the river and harbor act of March 
2, 1867, which provided for a channel of 14 feet depth, the estimated 
cost being $54,666. 



1966 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEEKS, U. S. ARMY. 

In 1870,- upon the recommendation of a board of engineers, pro- 
vision was made for the preservation of the peninsula protecting 
the harbor by planting trees and by a construction of brushwood 
and stone at an estimated cost of $10,000. This was done in 1871-72. 
over 50,000 trees and roots being planted. 

_ In August, 1874, a board of engineers was convened to devise a 
mode of protection for the north spit at the entrance to the harbor. 
The recommendation of the board, which was appioved, provided for 
a construction of pile work and rubble stone, which was built in 
1874-75 to a length of 1,472 feet. 

A modification providing for the extension of the piers to the 
16-foot curve in the lake was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
August 5, 1886, the estimated cost being $84,120; and by the river 
and harbor act of September 19, 1890, a further modification provid- 
ing for extension of the north pier to the 18-foot curve at an esti- 
mated cost of $96,000 was adopted. (Annual Report for 1890, p. 
2796.) The north pier was extended under the project, between 1891 
and 1893, a total distance of 753 feet. 

The total amount expended on this harbor to 1899 was about 
$842,000. 

2. HARBOR AT DUNKIRK, N. Y. 

The harbor lies in an indentation of the shore between two points 
about 9,600 feet apart, the maximum width of the bay behind the 
two headlands being about 3,600 feet. The original project, adopted 
by the river and harbor act of March 2, 1827, provided for a pier 
extending outward from the west shore of the indentation and a 
detached breakwater parallel with the pier and about 2.000 feet from 
the city front. An opening between the two structures provided a 
harbor entrance through which a channel leading to the docks was to 
be deepened to 13 feet. By 1832, $28,439.84 had been expended on 
this project, and the breakwater was then 2,564 feet long and the 
pier 1,400 feet long. In 1848 the breakwater was demolished. 

In 1854 a project was prepared by a board of Engineers which 
provided for three separate breakwaters extending on a line from 
Light-House Point to Battery Point in 18 feet of water, estimated 
cost $192,600.81. (Annual Eeport for 1866, p. 155.) This estimate 
was increased in 1857 to $401,818.66. Very little work was done 
under this project, about 250 feet of the western breakwater having 
been constructed. 

A modification of project was recommended in 1866 (Annual 
Report for 1866, p. 155) to return to the original plan for the harbor. 
but modifying it by throwing the breakwater outward a little and 
prolonging it eastward to the 9-foot curve. Appropriation for the 
work was made by the river and harbor act of March 2, 1867. and 
the construction of the breakwater was started in 1868. 

On August 1, 1868, the removal of the old breakwater was author- 
ized by the Chief of Engineers (Annual Report for 1868, p. 195), and 
its removal was completed in 1871. 

A board of Engineers was convened in 1870 to consider the im- 
provement of the harbor. The board recommended the reconstruc- 
tion of a dummy crib as a day beacon, and the construction of a 
breakwater 2,860 feet long, 2,300 feet of which was to be nearlv 



APPENDIX, 1967 

parallel with the shore and 560 feet nearly parallel with the axis of 
the entrance channel. An entrance channel 170 feet wide was to be 
dredged to a depth of 13 feet. The estimated cost was $331,000. 
(Annual Eeport for 1871, p. 216.) This project was approved 
November 30, 18T0. Between 1870 and 1896 about $313,000 was 
expended. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, 
provided for the completion of the breakwater as before planned by 
the addition of 360 feet to its eastern end and adding the channel 
arm, 560 feet long, and in addition thereto dredging the entrance 
channel 170 feet to 350 feet wide and a harbor basin about 2,400 feet 
long and 1,000 feet wide to a depth at mean lake level suitable for 
vessels drawing 16 feet. The estimated cost was $408,258.50. The 
work was completed in 1898 at a cost of $389,060.55. 

3. HARBOR AT BUFFALO, N. Y. 

The original project for improvement of Buffalo Harbor was 
adopted by the river and harbor act of May 20, 1826, in accordance 
with a plan printed in 1824, which provided for rebuilding the north 
pier and repairing the south pier at the mouth of Buffalo Creek. 
These piers, which were constructed at the expense of the citizens of 
Buffalo and the State of New York at a cost of about $15,000, were 
then stone-filled pile structures, the north one being about 1,000 feet 
long and the south one about 1,300 feet long. 

Appropriations for completing and repairing the piers and dredg- 
ing channel between them were made by river and harbor acts of 
1828-1834, aggregating $124,594; by river and harbor acts of 1838- 
1844, under which about $50,000 was expended; and by act of 1874, 
$20,000. The entrance channel was dredged and the north pier 
repaired, and the south pier was repaired, rebuilt with stone super- 
structure or mole, and extended by timber crib work lakeward to its 
present length of 1,760 feet. Out of funds appropriated, the south 
pier was repaired and maintained and finally repaired in permanent 
concrete form in 1900-1901 ; but maintenance of dredging this chan- 
nel was done by the city of Buffalo, and the north pier was main- 
tained by the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Co. 

The river and harbor acts of June 6, 1900, and June 13, 1902. made 
special provision for deepening the entrance to Buffalo River and 
the City Ship Canal. 

The river and harbor act of June 25, 1910, provided for the re- 
moval of the "Watson elevator site on certain conditions, at estimated 
cost of $62,205. 

Under these provisions the following work was done : Dredging 
of the entrance channel from the breakwater to the north pier at 
the mouth of the river, a distance of 3,000 feet, to a depth of 23 
feet at mean lake level for a width of 300 feet ; also for a distance of 
1,240 feet up the river to a depth of 23 feet to the junction of 
Buffalo River and the City Ship Canal, with width of 180 feet at 
outer end of north pier increasing to 250 feet at inner ends of piers 
and to 720 feet in the basin 850 feet long at the junction of City Ship 
Canal. Cost, $116,254.57. 

Constructing concrete superstructure on 1,424 linear feet of the 
south pier in 1900-1901, at a total contract cost of $57,579.14. 



1968 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, TJ. S. ARMY. 

Constructing concrete superstructure on the outer 335 feet of the 
south pier to replace old timber superstructure, at a total cost of 
$11,320.25. 

Eemoving Watson elevator site at the junction of the Buffalo 
Eiver and City Ship Canal, a triangular area with a base of 220 feet 
and a length of 370 feet. It was purchased by the city of Buffalo 
and turned over to the United States on condition that it be dredged 
to a depth of 23 feet, at mean lake level, to provide a turning basin 
for vessels. This work was done at a cost of $49,124.39, including 
office and engineering expenses. 

The north pier was rebuilt in timber form in 1868-1870, by the 
Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Co., and has since been 
maintained by that company under its occupation of the pier with 
a coal shipping trestle. During the time the railroad company has 
had practically the exclusive use of the pier. 

A history of this occupancy and copies of official documents relat- 
ing thereto are given in the report for 1889, pages 2373-2383, and 
in the report for 1898, page 2775, et seq. 

Sea wall.— The act of July 7, 1838, appropriated $40,000 for be- 
ginning a masonry sea wall to be 6,740 feet long on sand beach along 
the lake shore south from Buffalo Eiver entrance channel. Appro- 
priations for continuing construction and repair were made 1844- 
1866, aggregating $123,301.37. After 5,721 feet had been constructed 
the work was abandoned in 1866 and the remaining funds, $23,485.04, 
were reappropriated for Buffalo Harbor by act of June 10, 1872. 

Sand-catch pier. — Adopted by river and harbor act of June 23, 
1874. A stone-filled pile pier, jutting out into the lake from the 
sand beach, 1| miles south of Buffalo Eiver, was built 870 feet long, 
10 feet wide and 6 feet high above water in 1874-1876, and extended 
to the established pierhead line, under the river and harbor act of 
June 3, 1896, to its total length of 1,148 feet, at a cost of about 
$25,000. 

Construction of outer breakwater and harbor. — Plans of a board 
of engineers, 1868, to form and protect an outer harbor by con- 
struction of 4,000 linear feet of breakwater in 27 feet of water, be- 
ginning in the prolongation of the south pier line, 2,500 feet lake- 
ward from the lighthouse thereon and extending thence southerly 
parallel with the shore, were adopted by river and harbor act of June 
23, 1866, $100,000, and continued under appropriations made by 
river and harbor acts of 1867-1874. aggregating $605,000. Under 
modified plans of board of engineers, 1874, the length was increased 
to 7,600 feet and provision made to construct a shore arm to connect 
with the sand-catch pier. On plans of board of engineers, 1886, to 
reconstruct superstructure with masonry and concrete, under appro- 
priations 1875-1894, aggregating $1,777,500, 3,800 linear feet of 
original timber superstructure was replaced with masonry and con- 
crete on the old section of the present breakwater, 7,608 feet long. 
Of the shore arm, 1,150 feet was built, but was destroyed by storm 
in 1893. The wreckage was removed in 1898. 

A new project was adopted by the river and harbor act of June 
3, 1896, based on the plans of a board of engineer officers, and con- 
sisted of the abandonment of the shore arm and the extension of the 
breakwater to Stony Point. 



APPENDIX. 1969 

The report of the board and details of its plans are published 
in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1895, pages 
3153 et seq. The river and harbor act added to the project of the 
board by providing for the construction of a further length of the 
sand-catch pier, extending it to the established pierhead line. 

Appropriations for the authorized breakwater extension were 
made by sundry civil acts of 1897-1902, aggregating $2,121,494. 

The sundry civil act of March 3, 1905, and the river and harbor 
act of March 2, 1907, provided funds aggregating $195,842 to build 
an arm 1,000 feet long to the Stony Point section of breakwater for 
the purpose of protecting the south harbor entrance, and the river 
and harbor act of February 27, 1911, provided that $15,000, or so 
much thereof as may be necessary, from funds previously appro- 
priated, may be applied to the completion of the Stony Point Break- 
water arm. 

The river and harbor act of March 2, 1907, appropriated $345,000 
for the repair and rebuilding of breakwaters damaged by storm in 
January, 1907. 

The river and harbor act of March 2, 1907, made special provi- 
sions for dredging at the entrance to canals at south end of the 
outer harbor to 23 feet depth, for excavating rock shoals outside of 
the north entrance to the depth of 23 feet. 

The river and harbor act of June 25, 1910, made special provision 
for further removal of shoals outside of the north entrance. 

The work done resulted in an outer harbor 4^ miles long, 1,600 
feet wide, and 23 feet deep at mean lake level, protected by a break- 
water system affording northerly and southerly entrances. 

The southerly entrance is 600 feet wide and not less than 28 feet 
deep at mean lake level, and the northerly entrance 800 feet wide and 
in course of being deepened to 25 feet at mean lake level. 

The breakwater system is 23,600 feet long and comprises 8.894 
linear feet of timber-crib-concrete type, 8,259 feet of stone or rubble- 
moimd type, 2,633 feet of timber-crib-stone type, and 3,823 feet of 
timber-crib type. 

Construction of south entrance channel arm. — Sundry civil act of 
March 3, 1905, $143,506; river and harbor act of March 2, 1907, 
$52,336. Length, 1,000 feet, running in a northwesterly direction 
from the north end of the Stony Point section, at an angle of 150° 
from that section, and built of stone. This was raised to a height 
of 12 feet below mean lake level with stone deposited by contractors 
for excavation in Lake Erie entrance to Black Rock Harbor and 
Erie Basin under contract terms, and the work above this level was 
done under contract. The work was commenced in 1906 and com- 
pleted in 1911, at a total cost of $189,154.74. The result of the work 
was to provide shelter for that part of the harbor injuriously affected 
by waves coming through the south entrance to the harbor. 

Excavation of rock shoals outside north entrance. — (See Annual 
Report, 1911; river and harbor act of June 25, 1910, $37,400.) To 
be removed so as to make an available depth of 23 feet at mean lake 
level. Work was begun under contract in 1912 and completed June 
4, 1913, 20,028 cubic yards, scow measure, rock having been exca- 
vated, at a total cost of $37,400, including office and engineering 
expenses. 

8373°— eng 1915 124 



1970 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, TJ. S. ARMY. 

This work accomplished the removal of the northerly half of the 
shoal area (GOO feet long and 300 feet wide) of bedrock, its center 
lying about 1,000 feet due west of the north end of the old break- 
water. 

5. BLACK ROCK HARBOR AND CHANNEL, N. Y. 

The original improvement of this harbor by the General Govern- 
ment was authorized by the river and harbor act of March 2, 1829, 
which appropriated $30,000 for extending the pier of Black Rock 
Harbor at the outlet of Lake Erie to a point opposite Bird Island. 
Additional appropriations aggregating $22,098 were made and the 
amounts expended in continuing the work between 1829 and 1834, 
after which no further work was done until the adoption of the 
present project. 

7. TONA WANDA HARBOR AND NIAGARA RIVER, N. Y. 

The original appropriation for the improvement of Tonawanda 
Harbor and the adjacent portion of Niagara River was made by the 
river and harbor act of March 3, 1881. (Annual Report for 1881, p. 
2426 et seq.) The project provided for the removal of bars in the 
channel between Tonawanda Island and the mainland and the re- 
moval of submerged rocks in the Niagara River channel adjacent to 
Tonawanda Island, in order to provide a depth of 13 feet at low 
water, the estimated cost being $15,000. This work was completed 
in 1881, at a cost of $5,000. 

8. NIAGARA RIVER, N. Y. 

The first work done for the improvement of this portion of the 
river was under a project adopted by the river and harbor act of July 
13, 1892. (Annual Report for 1892, pages 2541 et seq.) It provided 
for securing a channel 200 to 400 feet wide and 8 feet deep at mean 
river level from Tonawanda to Port Day by rock excavation, and for 
the construction of an embankment from Conners Island to Port 
Day. The estimated cost was $257,829. No work was done on this 
project. 

The project was modified by the river and harbor act of August 18, 
1894 (Annual Report for 1893, p. 3113), to provide a channel 200 
feet wide and 12 feet deep at low water from Tonawanda to Schlos- 
sers Dock, foot of Sugar Street, which is located about 2,000 feet 
above Gill Creek and is the port of Niagara Falls. The estimated 
cost of the work was $95,000. The improvement required a cut 
through two shoals, one a short distance above Conners Island and 
Schlossers Dock and the other about halfway between Cayuga Island 
and Tonawanda ; also the removal of scattered bowlders above 
Cayuga Island. The Conners Island cut was completed, but the 
Cayuga Island cut, through rock, was not excavated to full width, 
the work having been stopped in December, 1900, when funds were 
exhausted. 

The river and harbor act of June 25, 1910, provided for completion 
of the channel across Cayuga Island Shoal to a width of 200 feet and 
depth of 12 feet at mean river level, at a cost of $10,000, in accordance 



APPENDIX. 1971 

with plan printed in House Document No. 75, Sixtieth Congress, 
first session. The work was completed in 1911. 

The expenditures under these projects amounted to $68,507.21. 

9. HARBOR AT OLCOTT, N. Y. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1867, and provided for a channel 11 feet deep and 150 
feet wide between parallel piers about 200 feet apart from deep 
water in Lake Ontario to deep water in Eighteen Mile Creek. The 
estimated cost of the improvement was $117,927. 

In 1872 the project was modified to provide for the removal of rock 
in the channel between the piers. (Annual Report for 1872, p. 248.) 
The piers were completed in 1873 — the east pier 851 feet long and 
the west pier 881 feet long of timber-crib type, and by 1876 the 
channel had been dredged to a depth of 12 feet at low water, and a 
width of 115 feet. The amount expended on this work was around 
$111,000. 

In 1891 the project was modified to provide for a depth of 13.5 
feet at mean lake level from Main Street bridge to deep water in 
the lake, the channel to be 180 feet wide between the piers, narrow- 
ing to 98 feet at the bridge. No estimate of the cost of this modifica- 
tion appears in the records. The project was completed in 1892, at 
a cost of $15,213.18, and Olcott was dropped from the list of improve- 
ments, a balance of $1,465.35 being returned to the United States 
Treasury in January, 1896. 

Under an appropriation of $15,000 for " continuing improvement " 
(not based on any recommendation from the War Department) by 
the river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, the channel which had 
shoaled to 8 feet at low water, 10.4 feet at mean lake level, was re- 
dredged in 1903, 140 feet wide for the entire length between the 
piers and 100 feet wide for a length of 200 feet south from the 
inner ends of the piers. This redredging was done to a depth of 13.5 
feet at low water, practically 16 feet at mean lake level. Olcott was 
again dropped from the list of improvements in 1906, and a balance 
of $13.13 returned to the Treasury. 

10. HARBOR AT CHARLOTTE, N. Y. 

The original improvement was authorized by the river and harbor 
act of March 2, 1829. The project provided for securing a channel 
12 feet deep across the bar by constructing parallel piers about 450 
feet apart, extending to the 12-foot contour in the lake in order to 
confine and direct the action of the spring freshets. The estimated 
cost was $53,919.16. 

In 1834 the east pier had been extended to a length of 2,847 feet 
and the west pier to a length of 2,876 feet, and a channel 15 feet deep 
had been obtained, the total expenditure having been $91,161.05. 
Between 1835 and 1882 about $241,000 was expended in the mainte- 
nance and repair of the piers and in the reconstruction of such parts 
as had been destroyed by storms. 

A new project, based on the recommendation in the Annual Eeport 
of the Chief of Engineers for 1881, page 2437, was adopted by the 



1972 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

river and harbor act of August 2, 1882. It provided for obtaining a 
depth of 15 feet by extending the two piers a total distance of 3,250 
feet and by dredging, the estimated cost being $154,000. From the 
adoption of this project to June 30, 1896, about $190,000 was ex- 
pended, $77,235 for the extension of the piers a distance of 1,444 feet, 
and the remainder for dredging and repair of piers. The project 
was modified by authority of the Chief of Engineers July 18, 1896, 
to preserve the depth by dredging without further extension of the 
piers for the present, and by authority of the Chief of Engineers 
March 2, 1897, it was again modified to obtain and maintain not 
less than 16 feet and not more than 16^- feet at low water in a channel 
not more than 200 feet wide. 

11. HARBOR AT PULTNEYVILLE, N. Y. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
July 11, 1870, and provided for protecting the approach to the creek 
by building two piers of timber cribs in the lake, about 200 feet apart, 
and for dredging a channel from the 10-foot curve in the lake to the 
mouth of the creek, the channel to be 10 feet deep at low water, at 
an estimated cost of $59,000. This estimate was increased in 1875 
to $71,000, clue to the hardness of the material dredged. 

By 1883 the piers had been extended to their present lengths, the 
west pier 910 feet and the east pier 572 feet. Dredging was done in 
the channel in 1873, 1875, and 1880 to secure the required depth, but, 
due to the washing of sand from the harbor beach, the channel was 
not permanent and shoaled rapidly. 

In 1884 a sheet-pile pier 500 feet long was proposed to be con- 
structed at the eastern side of the entrance to the creek for the pur- 
pose of stopping this sand drift. The estimated cost of the pier, with 
the necessary dredging to restore the 10-foot channel depth, was 
$30,000. A length of 200 feet of the pier was built in 1891 and 1892. 

In 1899 and 1900 the channel was redredged to a depth of 8 feet at 
low water and a width of 20 feet. This work exhausted the avail- 
able funds and no further work was done until 1907. 

12. HARBOR AT GREAT SODUS BAY, N. Y. 

The original project for improvement of this harbor was adopted 
by the river and harbor act of March 2, 1829, and provided for nar- 
rowing the entrance to the bay by constructing two converging 
breakwaters extending outward from the shore — east breakwater 
1,400 feet and west breakwater 2,200 feet long — and for securing the 
channel by extending parallel piers about 500 feet apart northward 
from the ends of the breakwaters. The estimated cost was $71,931.26. 
Under appropriations made from 1829 to 1833. amounting to $77,230, 
the breakwaters, 640 feet of the west pier and 80 feet of the east pier, 
were built, as well as a jetty 150 feet long, extending southeasterly 
from the angle of the east pier. It was found that the channel could 
not be obtained without dredging, and in 1833 an estimate of $20,000 
was made for securing by dredging a channel 1.500 feet long, 150 feet 
wide, and 15 feet deep. (See Annual Report for 1874, p. 253.) 



APPENDIX. 1973 

From 1834 to 1838 appropriations amounting to $60,790 were 
made, under which the piers were completed and dredging opera- 
tions were carried on. 

Between 1838 and 1866, $15,000 was appropriated and expended in 
the repair of the piers. 

The project was modified by the river and harbor act of June 23, 
1866, to extend the west pier and dredge the channel to 12 feet depth, 
estimated at $120,806. (Annual Report for 1866, pp. 171, 173, 174.) 
Under this project the west pier was extended 130 feet, and during 
the period from 1866 to 1881 about $191,000 was expended in dredg- 
ing in the channel and repairing the piers. In 1880 the structures 
were reported to have the following lengths : West breakwater, 2,200 
feet; east breakwater, 1,590 feet; west pier, 1,400 feet; east pier, 940 
feet. It was also reported that the channel had shoaled to such an 
extent that the depth was no greater. than before the improvement 
was commenced in 1829. 

13. HARBOR AT LITTLE SODUS BAY, N. Y. 

The original project for improvement was adopted by the river 
and harbor act of August 30, 1852, and work was begun in 1854. A 
survey had been made in 1829 and a project prepared to close one of 
two openings into the bay by a dike and, at the other opening, to 
construct two parallel piers, each 870 feet long, extending into the 
lake, the estimated cost being $32,327.59. In 1853, when a new sur- 
vey was made, it was found that the bar between the openings had 
been swept away, but it was determined to construct the piers as orig- 
inally planned and connect their inner ends to shore by breakwaters. 
After 240 feet of the west pier had been constructed and connected 
with shore by riprap, at an expense of about $10,000, work was sus- 
pended in 1856, due to lack of funds. An appropriation of $33,840.41 
having been made by the river and harbor act of June 23, 1866, a 
project was prepared by Lieut. Col. Blunt to extend the west pier out 
to a depth of 12 feet at low water, to connect it with the west shore 
by riprap or otherwise, and to dredge a channel 400 feet wide and 12 
feet deep at low water, the inner end on the east side to be connected 
with shore by riprap. The estimated cost was $80,000. By the close 
of 1868 the west pier was completed to a length of 800 feet, 650 feet 
of crib work, connecting the west pier with shore, had been con- 
structed, and a channel 200 feet wide and 8 to 15 feet deep had been 
dredged. 

In 1871 Maj. Bowen proposed the construction of an east pier 500 
feet long and 250 feet from the west pier, with a breakwater 1,800 
feet connecting its inner end to shore, the estimated cost being 
$62,100. (Annual Report for 1871, p. 234.) 

Under appropriations made from 1871 to 1880, aggregating $110,- 
000, the east pier was constructed to a length of 512 feet and the 
breakwater to a length of 1,524 feet. In addition, repairs were made 
to pier and dredging was done when necessary. 

14. HARBOR AT OSWEGO, N. Y. 

The original project for the harbor was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of March 2, 1827, and provided for building across the 



1974 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

cove at the mouth of the river a timber-crib breakwater, with an 
opening to provide an entrance from the lake into the cove. This 
breakwater was completed in 1829, the westerly arm being 1,170 feet 
long with a shore return 260 feet long, and the easterly arm 570 feet 
long, the opening between them being 350 feet in width. 

The project was modified by the river and harbor act of March 2, 
1831, to proA T ide for a mole and pierhead outside the west breakwater 
for its protection, at an estimated cost of $12,720. Between 1831 and 
1866, under appropriations aggregating $275,083.81, work on the 
mole was prosecuted until 1838, when it was abandoned; masonry su- 
perstructure was placed on 500 feet of the breakwater, a lighthouse 
was built, and the breakwater was repaired and rebuilt as necessary. 

By the river and harbor act of June 23, 1866, a modification was 
adopted, which provided for dredging the harbor to a depth of 12 
feet, at an estimated cost of $100,000 to $120,000. (Annual Import 
for 1866, pp. 56, IV, 169.) A further modification adopted by the 
river and harbor act of July 25, 1868, provided for the extension of 
the lighthouse pier 500 feet into the lake; estimated cost, $50,000. 
The dredging was completed in 1869 and the pier in 1870; length 437 
feet. The total expenditure on the harbor to this time was $179,- 
162.87, of which $41,000 was for dredging, the remainder having been 
expended on the pier and breakwater. 

The river and harbor act of July 11, 1870, adopted a new project 
which provided for forming an outer harbor by building an outer 
breakwater 5,800 feet long to be located nearly parallel to the old 
west breakwater and 1,100 feet from it, the estimated cost being 
$1,161,682. This project was completed in 1881, the timber-crib 
breakwater as constructed having a lake face 4,870 feet long, a west- 
erly shore return 916 feet long, and an easterly return 246 feet long, 
the total length being 6,032 feet. The amount expended from 1871 
to 1881 was $832,910.09, of which a portion was applied to the mainte- 
nance of the old and new breakwaters. 

A modification of project was adopted by the river and harbor act 
of March 3, 1881, and provision was made for the construction of an 
east breakwater 2,700 feet long, an opening of 350 feet to be left be- 
tween it and the west breakwater for the passage of vessels; esti- 
mated cost $287,000. (Annual Report for 1879, p. 1734.) A length 
of 248 feet of this breakwater was constructed in 1881, but was re- 
moved in 1889. 

In 1882 the project was modified to provide for building 300 linear 
feet of spurs to the lake arm of the outer breakwater as wave break- 
ers ; estimated cost $60,000. (Annual Eeport for 1882. pp. -2 1 51-2452. ) 
Two spurs which were 100 and 150 feet long, respectively, were built 
in 1885 and 1889, at a cost of $16,786.64. The former was 250 feet 
from the east end and the latter 2,600 feet from the west end of the 
breakwater. 

The sundry civil act of March 3, 1893, authorized the expenditure 
of the unexpended balance of the appropriation made July 13, 1892, 
for this harbor for rock excavation in the mouth of the Oswego 
River, and the river and harbor act of August 17, 1894, appropriated 
$10,000 for the same purpose. These amounts were applied to the 
excavation and the rock removed to the depth of 15 feet from Schuy- 



APPENDIX. 1975 

ler Street 340 feet upstream to a line 80 feet downstream from the 
north line of Seneca Street. The cost was $18,172.75. 

15. HARBOR AT CAPE VINCENT, N. Y. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
June 3, 1896, and provided for the construction of a breakwater 
1,600 feet long, parallel to and 600 feet from the railroad wharf, at 
an estimated cost of $320,000. No construction work was done under 
this project, a survey having indicated that a better foundation 
could be obtained and the breakwater more cheaply constructed if 
built at a distance of 500 feet from the railroad wharf. (Project 
printed in Annual Eeport for 1889, p. 2433.) 

16. HARBOR AT OGDENSBURG, N. Y. 

The improvement of this harbor was begun in 1868 under provi- 
sions of the river and harbor act of March 2, 1867. The original 
project was to dredge to a depth of 12 feet at low water (1) the 
channel of the Oswegatchie River below the Lake Street bridge be- 
tween the wharf lines; (2) along the wharves a mile below; (3) 
a channel 150 feet wide along the city front connecting these local- 
ities; (4) a channel 300 feet wide across the shoal between the 
channels of the St. Lawrence and Oswegatchie Rivers, and to build, 
if necessary, 5,500 linear feet of piers, at an estimated cost of $100,000. 
(Annual Report for 1868, p. 271.) The piers were never built. The 
dredging was completed in 1876 at a cost of about $107,000. 

The project was modified by the river and harbor act of August 2, 
1882, to provide for dredging the upper entrance channel from the 
St. Lawrence River channel across the shoal to and into the mouth 
of the Oswegatchie River to 16 feet at low water, at an estimated 
cost of $76,000. (Annual Report for 18S2, p. 2461.) On account 
of the quantity of hardpan encountered, the estimate for this proj- 
ect was increased to $108,000. (Annual Report for 1885, p. 2295.) 
The amount expended on dredging under this project was $51,000. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act of September 19, 
1890, provided for dredging all the channels to a depth of 16.5 feet 
below the zero of the Ogdensburg gauge (15 feet below zero of the 
Oswego gauge), at an estimated cost of $158,950. (Annual Report 
for 1890, p. 2872.) This project was modified by authority of the 
Chief of Engineers February 27, 1897, to deepen the two lower en- 
trance channels to 16 feet below the zero of the Oswego gauge, and by 
the river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, further modified to dredge 
900 feet of the channel along the city front above Franklin Street to 
but 14 feet below the same zero, the projected depth of the upper 
channel to and into the mouth of the Oswegatchie River up to the 
bridge, and the balance of the channel along the city front to remain 
15 feet. This project was completed in July, 1903, at a cost of about 
$111,000. 



1976 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE LOS ANGELES, 
CAL, DISTRICT. 



1. SAN DIEGO HARBOR, CAL. 

The project, authorized by act of August 30, 1852, appropriated 
$30,000 to build a levee across the mouth of the San Diego River and 
turn it into its former channel into False Bay. Shortly afterwards 
the embankment or levee built by this appropriation was carried away 
in a freshet, and the river resumed its old course into San Diego 
Bay. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1875, appropriated $80,000 for 
the diversion of the river. (See S. Doc. No. 25, 41st Cong., 2d sess.) 
An earthen dike 7,735 feet long, faced on the river side with rubble 
stone, was completed in 1876 at a cost of $79,798.72. Repairs to this 
dike made with later appropriations (not including appropriation of 
1890) have brought this cost up to $81,918.45. Some repairs have also 
been made by the city of San Diego. 

The river and harbor act of September 19, 1890, authorized the 
maintenance of the dike, the construction of a jetty 7,500 feet long 
on Zuninga Shoal, with a view to securing a depth of 26 feet on the 
outer bar, and dredging the middle ground channel, with a view to 
securing a channel 500 feet wide and 24 feet deep at mean lower low 
water. (See H. Doc. No. 177, 50th Cong., 1st sess.) This project was 
completed in February, 1905, at a total cost of $543,293.23. Repairs 
were made to the dike at a cost of $4,913.58; a rubble stone jetty 
7.500 feet long was built on Zuninga Shoal to the height of extreme 
high water; a channel 26 feet deep and 271 feet wide (28 feet deep 
over a width of 171 feet) was dredged through the outer bar; and a 
channel 26 feet deep and 400 feet wide was dredged through the 
middle ground. 

The river and harbor acts of March 3, 1905, March 2, 1907, and 
March 3, 1909, appropriated in all $60,000 for maintenance of the 
outer bar channel. The amount expended in this work was $59,904.21. 

The river and harbor act of June 25, 1910, appropriated $125,000 
for dredging through the outer bar a channel 600 feet wide and 30 
feet deep at mean lower low water, and through the middle ground a 
channel 30 feet deep at mean lower low water, and 400 feet wide at 
its southerly end, and to widen out at the northerly end in order 
better to accommodate vessels using the United States Navy coaling 
station at La Play a. (See H. Doc. No. 961, 60th Cong., 1st sess.) 
This project was completed in May, 1912, at a cost of $124,703.68. A 
channel 600 feet wide and 30 feet deep (32 feet over a width of 300 
feet) was dredged through the outer bar, and a channel 30 feet deep 
and of a width increasing from 700 feet at the south end to 1,000 
feet at the north end was dredged through the middle ground. 

2. LOS ANGELES HARBOR, CAL. 

OUTER HARBOR. 

The original project was authorized by the river and harbor act 
of June 3, 1896, which directed the appointment of a board to con- 



APPENDIX. 1977 

sist of an officer of the Navy, an officer of the Coast and Geodetic 
Survey, and three civil engineers, and authorized the Secretary of 
War to make contracts for the completion of the improvement of 
the harbor selected by the board, according to the project reported 
by the board, at a cost not exceeding in the aggregate $2,900,000. The 
board recommended the construction of a breakwater at San Pedro 
Bay, and estimated that a breakwater 8,500 feet long could be built 
for the amount authorized. (See S. Doc. No. 18, 55th Cong., 1st 
sess.) Work on the breakwater began in April, 1899, under continu- 
ing contract, and was completed in September, 1910. A rubble- 
mound breakwater 9,265.5 feet long, 20 feet wide, and 14 feet high 
at mean lower low water was built, at a cost of $2,830,406.54, includ- 
ing $35,555.76 expended by the board. Above the low- water plane 
the breakwater consisted of two walls of roughly rectangular stone 
laid in courses and filled between with rubblestone. At the outer 
end of the breakwater was a concrete block 40 feet square and 20 
feet high. 

The extension of the breakwater to the shore was authorized in 
river and harbor act of June 25, 1910. (See H. Doc. No. 969, 60th 
Cong., 1st sess.) Work on the breakwater extension under contract 
began in April, 1911, and was completed in December, 1912. The ex- 
tension, 1,887 feet long, 15 feet wide, and 14 feet high at mean lower 
low water, was built of rubblestone, at a cost of $208,296.52. In 
addition to the $178,000 appropriated by act of June 25, 1910, 
$30,296.52 was expended from the balance of the $2,900,000 appro- 
priated for the construction of the breakwater authorized by act of 
June 3, 1896. 

INNER HARBOR. 

The original project, authorized by river and harbor act of March 
3, 1871, contemplated gaining a depth of 10 feet at mean lower low 
water at the entrance to the harbor " by connecting Eattlesnake and 
Deadmans Islands in a manner to compel the tidal currents to follow 
a defined channel." (See Annual Report for 1873, p. 1129.) As the 
work progressed the project broadened to include the construction of 
a jetty on the westerly side of the entrance channel and dredging the 
reef at the entrance. The depth of 10 feet having been obtained in 
1881, the river and harbor act of August 2, 1882, and later acts, pro- 
vided for continuing the improvement by raising the jetties and by 
dredging with a view to obtaining a depth at the entrance of 15 feet. 
The east jetty was extended from Rattlesnake Island to a point 425 
feet south of Deadmans Island, a distance, including Deadmans 
Island, of 7,560 feet. For 3,700 feet of the length it is built to the 
height of 9 feet above mean lower low water of sheet piling rein- 
forced on the ocean side with rubblestone, and for 2,425 feet farther 
it is built of rubblestone 10 feet wide on top and 10 feet high at mean 
lower low water. The west jetty was built of rubblestone from 
Timms Point, a distance of 3,400 feet, to its full height of 10 feet 
above mean lower low water and 10 feet wide, and 300 feet additional 
to ordinary high water. A channel 16 feet deep was obtained at the 
entrance. Work began in October, 1871, and was completed in No- 
vember, 1893, at a cost of $954,497.68. 



1978 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, V. S. ARMY. 

The river and harbor act of June 3, 1896, provided for further im- 
provement by dredging a channel 400 feet wide and 18 feet deep from 
San Pedro Bay to the lower end of the wharves, and along the har- 
bor fronts to the upper end of the wharves to a depth of 20 feet at 
mean lower low water, together with repairs to the east jetty. The 
estimated cost of this work was $392,725. (See S. Doc. No. Gl, 53d 
Cong., 3d sess.) Due to a proviso forming part of the act, no work 
was done. 

The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, provided for dredging a 
channel 20 feet deep and 400 feet wide from the outer harbor to the 
foot of the wharves, and 24 feet deep between harbor lines from the 
foot of the wharves to and including the turning basin 1,600 feet in 
diameter just below Mormon Island. It also provided for repairs to 
the east jetty and for the construction of a dike to divert the waters 
of the Los Angeles River from Wilmington Lagoon. (See H. Doc. 
No. 357, 56th Cong., 1st sess.) The same act made available the 
$50,000 appropriated by the act of June 3, 1896. The original esti- 
mated cost of the work, including the procurement of a dredging 
plant, was $550,000. This estimate was later increased to $663,000. 
On account of changed conditions the dike was not built. A portion 
of the east jetty was reinforced with rubble stone at a cost of $3,700. 
The 20-inch suction dredge San Pedro, with the necessary discharge 
pipe, floating plant, etc., was built at a cost of $118,721.78. A channel 
was dredged to a width of 400 feet and a depth of 21 feet at mean 
lower low water (except for a short distance abreast of Deadmaus 
Island, where the depth was only 20 feet) from the outer harbor up 
to the lower end of the wharves. From this point up to and includ- 
ing the turning basin, 1,600 feet in diameter, a total distance of 
16,000 feet, the channel was dredged to a depth of 25.5 feet and to 
the full width between wharves. The project was completed in June, 
1910, at a cost of $674,948.09. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE FIRST SAN 
FRANCISCO, CAL., DISTRICT. 



1. SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR, CAL. 

San Francisco Harbor has a broad and deep entrance and a good 
depth over the bar across the entrance, as well as very extensive areas 
of deep water within the harbor, so that in its natural condition the 
only improvements necessary were to remove the most dangerous 
submarine rocks scattered about the harbor and the surrounding bay. 

The first of these rocks to receive attention was Blossom Bock, 
lying about half way between Alcatraz Island and Verba Buoua. or 
Goat, Island, two prominent and well-known landmarks in the 
vicinity. The project for the removal of this rock was adopted in 
1868 and contemplated its removal to a depth of 24 feet at mean lower 
low water, involving the removal of about .">.000 cubic yards of rock. 
This work was done by contract and was completed in 1870 at. a con- 
tract price of $75,000. " 



APPENDIX. 1979 

In 1874 a project was adopted for the removal of Noonday Rock, a 
small pinnacle of rock about 3 miles northwest of the North Faral- 
lones and about 25 miles west of the entrance to the Golden Gate. 
The work was done by contract at a price of $20,000. In examining 
the rock with a diver before commencing operations the contractor 
discovered a large cavity within the rock. A heavy charge of high 
explosive was placed in this cavity and the rock was removed with 
qne blast to & depth of 48 feet at mean lower low water. This work 
was done in 1875. (Annual Report for 1875, p. 719.) 

In 1872 a plan was adopted for the removal of Rincon rock, lying 
on the water front of the city of San Francisco and adjacent to the 
wharves. The work was done by contract, but the blasting inter- 
fering with structures in the vicinity, the work was abandoned be- 
fore entirely completed and the contractor paid $39,483.88 for the 
work actually done. A total of about 4,000 cubic yards of rock was 
removed. This work completed all the work contemplated by pre- 
vious projects in this locality. 

2. REDWOOD CREEK, OAL. 

The river and harbor aot of July 5, 1884, adopted a project for 
improving Redwood Harbor, Cal., so as to provide a depth of 3 feet, 
no width being stated. This work was commenced in 1886 with a 
Government dredge, and depths of from 2 to 3 feet were obtained, 
with widths of from 50 to 60 feet. The work was continued there- 
after from year to year and extended down the creek itself. The 
work was completed in 1889. Redredging was resorted to at irreg- 
ular intervals, the channel being subject to considerable deterioration 
annually. 

The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, adopted a project con- 
templating a new channel 5 feet deep and 100 feet wide through the 
middle ground in the creek; dredging in front of the city wharf at 
Redwood City, Cal., building a dam of sheet piling across a navi- 
gable slough; and constructing a dike of timber and brush near but 
outside of the foot of the channel. The estimated cost was $8,400. 
This work was done by contract in 1903, but the dike and dam re- 
ferred to above were not constructed because of the interference 
with free tidal movement. (Annual Report for 1911, p. 966.) 

3. OAKLAND HARBOR, OAL. 

Pursuant to the river and harbor act of March 3, 1873, a board 
of engineer officers made a survey of Oakland Harbor and formu- 
lated the original project for its improvement to meet the needs of 
navigation and commerce. This project provided for two parallel 
mid-tide training walls, 1,000 feet apart at the entrance, estimated to 
cost $401,550; a tidal basin at the upper end, estimated to cost 
$799,525 ; a canal 8 feet deep and 300 feet wide connecting this basin 
with San Leandro Bay, estimated to cost $349,497 ; a dam 4 feet above 
low water across the mouth of San Leandro Bay, estimated to cost 
$65,010, and designed to make San Leandro Bay serve as an auxiliary 
tidal basin; and dredging a channel between the jetties 100 feet wide 
and 6 feet deep at low water, estimated to cost $33,990. To provide 



1980 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

for contingencies 10 per cent was added to each of the above items. 
(Annual Report for 1874, pt. 2, pp. 382, 383.) 

It was expected that the above works would soour and erode a 
channel about 500 feet wide and 18 to 20 feet deep between the jetties 
and in front of Oakland. 

It was estimated that it would take 30 years to complete the project, 
and operations were carried on with that time limit in view. Some 
features of the project were largely experimental in design, and as 
the work progressed considerable deviation from the original plans 
was found necessary to cope with the exigencies encountered. The 
necessary changes were made accordingly and in an informal way. 

The two training walls were constructed first, work being begun 
in 1874, but the city of Oakland having previously dredged an en- 
trance channel it was necessary to change their positions to accommo- 
date the dredged channel, and on account of trouble with owners of 
submerged land it was not possible to place them 1,000 feet apart. 
As they did not produce the desired effect, they were raised and made 
into high-water jetties. The channel between the jetties was dredged 
in 1881 and 1882, the width being increased to 300 feet and the depth 
to 14 feet in the center and 10 feet on the sides. 

In 1874 dredging was begun in the tidal basin by the hydraulic- 
dredge process. It may be interesting to note that the first hydraulic 
dredge ever constructed was used on this work, although it had been 
previously used on the San Joaquin River, and it was on this work 
that the first ladder dredge was used. As the sole object was to secure 
increase of tidal prism, only soft material was dredged, and no 
attempt was made to produce a channel. 

In the meantime the excavation of the canal had been delayed on 
account of the difficulties of securing a right of way. The appropria- 
tion for this part of the project stipulated that local interests should 
furnish land for the right of way free of cost to the United States, 
and the county provided the necessary funds, but the condemnation 
proceedings were so long drawn out that the county diverted its 
funds to other purposes. 

In the meantime experience with the tidal scour indicated that the 
canal was not necessary, and it was recommended that it be omitted 
from the project, but as Congress had provided the money for its 
excavation it was deemed imperative to include it. Work was not 
commenced until the United States provided the necessary funds, 
which was in 1889. The width of the canal was changed to 400 feet. 
In addition, the United States constructed three highway bridges 
across the tidal canal and dredged the outlet of Sausal Creek, not 
originally contemplated in the project. 

The deepening effect expected from the tidal scour did not mate- 
rialize, and it was found necessary to dredge the channel in front of 
Oakland in order to secure sufficient depths. As time passed, further 
dredging was done in the jetty channel also in order to secure the 
depths originally contemplated. 

The dam across the mouth of San Leandro Bay was never con- 
structed. 

Tidal scour has had practically no effect on the project. As there 
are no streams emptying into the harbor, silting is not excessive. 

The first formal modification of the project is found in House 
Document No. 262, Fifty-sixth Congress, second session (Annual 



APPENDIX. 1981 

Report for 1901, pp. 3448, 3449), which presented three alternate 
plans. By the river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, a modification 
of the project was authorized, but without specifying which one of 
the three plans the funds should be applied to. The river and harbor 
act of March 3, 1905, officially designated plan No. 3 as the approved 
modification. This plan provided for a channel 500 feet wide and 25 
feet deep from San Francisco Bay to Chestnut Street, a channel 300 
feet wide and 25 feet deep from Chestnut Street to Fallon Street, a 
channel 300 feet wide and 17 feet deep from Fallon Street to the tidal 
basin, a channel 300 feet wide and 12 feet deep completely around 
the tidal basin, and the extension of the south jetty; estimated to 
cost $968,203. 

By special restriction, however, in the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1905, the channel between San Francisco Bay and Chestnut 
Street, for which funds were therein authorized, was limited to a 
width of 300 feet. The act of March 2, 1907, further modified the 
project by providing for extension of south jetty 500 feet, widening 
to 500 feet the channel 25 feet deep from San Francisco Bay to 
Fallon Street, deepening to 25 feet the channel 300 feet wide from 
Fallon Street to the tidal basin, deepening to 17 feet the channel 300 
feet wide around the north side of the tidal basin to the tidal canal 
and from the tidal canal along the Alameda shore to Tenth Avenue. 
The estimated cost was placed at $1,468,203. Before this project was 
completed the present project was adopted by the act of June 25, 1910. 

4. SAN PABLO BAY, OAL. 

This is a large body of water lying between Suisun Bay on the 
north and San Francisco Bay on the south. It is used by vessels ply- 
ing to the several industrial centers along the eastern shore as well 
as to the few creeks and sloughs emptying into the bay, but the prin- 
cipal trade route is to Port Costa, the great California grain port, 
and Mare Island Navy Yard. Across this route there lies a shoal 5 
miles in width, known as Pinole Shoal. 

The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, adopted the original 
project for a channel across this shoal 300 feet wide, 30 feet deep, 
with a length of about 5 miles, at an estimated cost of $381,000, with 
$16,000 estimated as cost of annual maintenance. (See H. Doc. No. 
89, 56th Cong., 1st sess.) This work was undertaken in 1903 by con- 
tract, but the contractor defaulted and it was subsequently relet to 
another contractor and finally completed in 1906. 

The excavation at this locality is easy but the difficulties of dispos- 
ing of the material are unusually great. Some of the material was 
placed behind an impounding bulkhead, but as that method proved 
too expensive the greater portion of the material was dumped m deep 
water within the bay. It did not remain where dumped, however, 
but was carried by the currents onto the flats along the northwest 
shore of the bay, where natural agencies are causing gradual 
shoaling. 

Owing to the soft material, deterioration of this improvement was 
rapid and the channel was totally obliterated in a short time, but the 
general depth over the shoal remained greater than it was before the 
improvement was undertaken. 



1982 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

Originally the main object to be obtained by this improvement was 
to permit Navy vessels to reach Mare Island Navy Yard, but the 
rapid increase in size and draft of Navy vessels in the past 15 years 
has been such that it now requires a 40-foot channel for the larger 
type of Navy vessels, and the result has been that Mare Island Navy 
Yard is counted upon as available only for the lighter-draft vessels. 
The rapid growth of shipping from San Pablo Bay points in the 
meantime has developed an amount of commerce that warrants and 
requires a deep-water channel at this locality. 

6. PETALUMA CREEK AND NAPA RIVER, CAL. 

(a) PETALUMA CREEK. 

This waterway drains an area of 83 square miles, mostly agri- 
cultural land; consequently there are large quantities of detritus 
brought down with the annual rains and deposited in the channel. 
In its natural condition the creek was very crooked at the upper end 
and dry at low water. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
June 14, 1880, and contemplated dredging to obtain a depth of 3 feet 
and making three cut-offs in the upper part of the creek just below 
the town of Petaluma. (Annual Report for 1880, p. 2243.) Work 
was commenced in 1880 under contract and was continued from year 
to year and finally completed in 1884 at a total cost of $27,676. The 
three cut-offs were made and the channel dredged to a width of 50 
feet and depth of 3 feet up to within 2,600 feet of Petaluma : thence 
to the head of navigation it was made 40 feet wide and 2 feet deep. 
(Annual Report for 1884, p. 2198.) 

Due to the rapid silting, the channel was redredged from time to 
time with a Government dredge, and in 1892 the project was modified 
so as to dredge a channel with a Government dredge and make it as 
deep as funds would permit. As a result of this work the channel 
was first dredged to 4 feet depth in the lower part of the improved 
section and 3 feet depth in the upper part. It was again dredged 
with a Government dredge in 1896 and made 50 feet wide and 6 feet 
deep up to within 1 mile of Petaluma. and thence to the head of navi- 
gation it was dredged the same width but the depth gradually re- 
duced to 4 feet. (Annual Report for 1896, p. 3206.) 

Silting in this stream being rapid, almost annual dredging is neces- 
sary to keep a ship channel open to the head of navigation. 

8. HUMBOLDT HARBOR AND BAY, CAL. 

(a) REBUILDING JETTIES. 

In 1876 consideration was given this locality as a site for a harbor 
of refuge, but it was rejected because of the great cost of constructing 
the two parallel jetties at the entrance which was reported as the only 
practicable means of improvement. In 1881 its claims for national 
aid in the development of a commercial port were first brought for- 
ward. The commerce of the locality then was small and hardly war- 
ranted the heavy expense of the necessary jetties, but the groat natu- 
ral resources of the immediately surrounding country and its isola- 



APPENDIX. 1983 

tion from the rest of the State by high mountain barriers, together 
with the fact that there was no other seaport on the Pacific coast 
within hundreds of miles, combined to force engineers to find some 
method for improving the condition of the entrance channel. 

Humboldt Bay itself is a narrow body of water running parallel to 
the coast line and separated from the ocean by a narrow strip of sand. 
An opening about 2,000 feet in width through this sand strip forms a 
natural entrance to the bay. The tidal discharge through this outlet 
is 100,000 second-feet and the cross-sectional area is about 50,000 
square feet with depths of from 60 to 70 feet. Under natural condi- 
tions this channel spreads out in crossing the bar and shifts consid- 
erably from a southwest to a northwest direction, and for brief 
periods of time during the cycle of changes it had a straight course 
to sea, but the depth varied greatly, being as much as 25 feet at times 
when the channel was running southwest and as low as 9 feet as it 
shifted toward the north. The tendency of the tidal scour is toward 
the southwest, and these changes in direction of the channel are 
caused by the prevailing southwest storms driving sand from the 
beach and bar on the south toward the north, forcing the channel 
northerly until the outer segment has a direction about parallel to 
the coast. When the limit of movement in this direction has been 
reached a new outlet breaks through to the southwest and the cycle 
of changes repeats itself. A favorable feature is that the outfall of 
the bar channel is upon an ocean bed which rapidly increases in 
depth. 

The original project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
July 5, 1884, and provided for the construction of a single low-water 
jetty starting from the south spit and running in a northwesterly 
direction for 5,000 or 6,000 feet, with a top width of 20 feet and suit- 
able side slopes. The idea of this jetty was to intercept the move- 
ment of sand toward the north. The estimated cost of the work was 
$600,000 and work was begun under contract in May, 1889. The 
jetty was built by the trestle method with a brush mattress 4 feet 
thick as a foundation, with rubblestone forming the mass of the 
jetty. (Annual Report for 1900, p. 4237.) The first effect of this 
work was to cut away the north spit. In one year the low-water 
width of the entrance, which was 2,100 feet at the beginning of the 
work, had increased to 3,500 feet. These changes were so marked 
that the project was modified so as to provide for shore-protection 
work on the north spit and the construction of a second jetty start- 
ing from the north spit and running seaward nearly parallel to the 
south jetty, both jetties to extend out to the 18-foot contour and 
both to be raised to slightly above the plane of high water, so as to 
confine the tidal flow straight out to sea. The width of the jetty top 
was changed to 10 feet and the height of the crest changed to 8 feet 
above low- water level. The projected direction of the south jetty 
was changed to a more nearly westerly course and its length was 
increased to 7,800 feet, the north jetty to be 6,750 feet in length, and 
their seaward ends to be about 2,100 feet apart. The average depth 
of water in which the jetties were to be built was taken as 12 feet. 
The width of the jetty base varied from 45 to 60 feet, according to 
the depth of water. The estimated cost of the entire work under 
modified project, including shore protection, was $2,057,615. (Annual 
Report for 1891, p. 3129.) 



1984 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

Work was begun under contract in May, 1891, on this modified 
project. The entrance, having increased in width to 5,000 feet, more 
than double its original width, the first work was for shore protection 
on the north spit, consisting of brush mats covered with rock. There- 
after work was continued on the north jetty, and it was completed in 
April, 1SD7. Work was then resumed on the south jetty, and it was 
completed in August, 1899. 

In the course of construction it was found that the sand spits piled 
up on the outer side of the jetty, but on the channel side the current 
scoured the sand out, so as to seriously endanger the foundation of 
the jett}\ This difficulty was overcome by the construction of spurs, 
or groins, at selected points along the channel side. 

As completed the north jetty had a total length of 8,068 feet and a 
crest height varying from 5 to 10 feet above mean lower low water 
for about 5,000 feet of its length from shore. For the next 2,000 feet 
its crest height varied from 3 to 5 feet above low-water level, and the 
outer 1,000 feet sloped from low- water level to a depth of 12 feet 
below this plane at the outer end. The south jetty had a total length 
of 7,408 feet, with a crest height of 10 feet above low-water level for 
6,560 feet from shore, thence gradually sloping in the next 800 feet 
to a depth of 8 feet below low water. The outer end of the jetty was 
28 feet below low water. 

The slopes on the outer ends of the jetties were apparently made 
to reduce the quantities of stone used and keep the work within the 
estimated cost. 

Notwithstanding the fact that the jetties were not built to the full 
height contemplated by the project, yet they proved very effective in 
the direction desired and produced a channel 30 feet deep, 600 feet 
wide, straight to sea. The cross section used, however, was too light 
to withstand the violence of the heavy seas prevailing in this locality 
and the jetties deteriorated rapidly. Upon the completion of the jet- 
ties all work was abandoned and no effort made to repair the damage 
of the successive winter seasons. In a comparatively short time the 
effective outer ends had practically disappeared and the unfavorable 
conditions of the bar channel reappeared practically as they existed 
originally in the natural state. 

The experiences with these two jetties seems to indicate that only 
very substantially built jetties can be expected to be reasonably per- 
manent in this locality and that regular maintenance work with 
timely repairs of damage done by winter storms is more economical 
in the long run than abandonment of all work upon first completion 
of the jetties. 

(b) channel in front of eureka. 

The river and harbor act of March 3, 1881, adopted a project for 
this locality, but apparently without any well-defined limits for the 
channel proposed. A channel 10 feet deep, 350 feet wide, had been 
suggested, together with additional channels to Areata and Hookton 
within Humboldt Bay. (Annual Report for 1881, p. 2485.) Work- 
was begun under contract in 1881 and a channel dredged 10 feet deep, 
240 feet wide, 4,100 feet long in front of Eureka. (Annual Report 
for 1882, p. 2540.) In 1883-84 this channel was deepened to 13 feet, 
150 feet wide for a distance of 1,150 feet, 100 feet wide for an addi- 



APPENDIX. 1985 

tional distance of 1,230 feet, and 50 feet wide for a farther distance 
of 630 feet. 

The cost of the above work can not be definitely determined, be- 
cause it was done in connection with other work at the entrance to 
Humboldt Bay, but the original estimate was 35 cents per cubic yard 
for dredging ; the first contract price was 25 cents per cubic yard and 
the second contract price 48 cents per cubic yard. 

In 1S98 this project was modified so as to provide a channel 200 
feet wide, 15 feet deep, 8,900 feet long, at an estimated cost of $75,000. 
(See H. Doc. No. 52S, 55th Cong., 2d sess.) The work was begun 
under contract in 1899 and completed in 1900, at a cost of $50,000. 

This local itv is not subject to very much deterioration, so that im- 
provements are fairly permanent, but occasional dredging at inter- 
vals of 7 or 8 years is necessary for maintenance. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS 
FOR IMPROVEMENTS UNDER THE SACRAMENTO-FEATHER RIVER 
BOARD. 



1 SACRAMENTO AND FEATHER RIVERS, CAL. (GENERAL IMPROVE- 
MENT). 

The first appropriation for the Sacramento and Feather Rivers 
was made March 3, 1S75. It was to be used for " extracting snags 
in the Sacramento Ri\er and for the improvement of the Feather 
River b}' removal of snags and by construction of brush jetties." 
(Annual Report for 1875, pt. 2, p. 696.) This was the original 
project for this improvement. 

This project was modified by the river and harbor act approved 
August 7, 1882, in accordance with House Document No. 98, Forty- 
seventh Congress, first session, which provided for restraining bar- 
riers (for mining debris) in the Yuba, Bear, and American Rivers 
and for dredging in the Sacramento and Feather Rivers. (Annual 
Report for 1882, p. 2533.) 

The project was further modified by the act approved December 
21, 1889, which made the balance to the credit of the Sacramento and 
Feather Rivers immediately available for expenditure in improving 
navigation bv repairing damages caused by floods. (Annual Report 
for 1890, p. 2912.) 

The project was again modified by the river and harbor act ap- 
proved July 13, 1892, in accordance with House Document No. 246, 
Fifty-first Congress, second session, which contemplated a perma- 
nent annual appropriation of $25,000 for improvement by the use of 
snagbcat and crew in the Sacramento River above Sacramento, a 
specific appropriation of $275,000 for the removal of obstructions in 
the Lower Sacramento, and $25,000 for the closure of Jacob's break; 
a specific appropriation of $300,000 for treatment of the Yuba River 
near and above Marysville and a " specific annual expenditure of 
$20,000 for improvement of the navigable channel of the Feather 
Biver." 

Although slight additions to this modification and changes in esti- 
mates have been made by later acts, the project has not been mate- 

8373°— eng 1915—125 



1986 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

rially altered since, nor any of its provisions rescinded by Congress. 
The act which became a law August 18, 1894, added to the project 
the treatment of the Bear River and authorized a cut-off on the 
Feather River to avoid Shanghai Bend. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OP PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE FIRST DISTRICT, 
PORTLAND, OREG. 



1. COQUILLI-: RIVER, OREG. 

The original project for improving Coquille River, Oreg., was 
adopted by the river and harbor act of June 14, 1880, and provided 
for the construction of two converging high-tide jetties of rubble- 
stone, 800 feet apart, so located as to cause the river to empty into 
the sea about one-half mile north of its original mouth, these jetties 
to run to sea a sufficient distance to create and maintain a channel 
12 feet deep at low tide. The estimated cost was $104,200. In 1880 
the proposed depth was reduced to 10 feet, in 1888 to 8 feet, and on 
May 8„1891, the plan was changed to provide that the jetties should 
be 600 feet apart at their outer ends instead of 800 feet. In 1892 
the length of the north jetty was limited to 1,575 feet and that of 
the south jetty to 2,700 feet, while the estimated cost of completing 
the improvement, including the previous appropriations, amounting 
to $105,000 (and including the $0,883.90 expended in removing snaga 
in the river between Coquille and Myrtle Point under river and har- 
bor acts of Aug. 11, 1888, and Sept. 19, 1890), was increased from 
$164,200 to $283,018.04. (Annual Report for 1892, p. 2664.) 

The river and harbor acts of August 11, 18S8, and September 19, 
1890, in making appropriations for continuing the work of improve- 
ment at the entrance to the river, authorized the expenditure of 
$5,000 and $3,000, respectively, in removing snags in the 12 miles 
of the upper portion of the river between Coquille and Myrtle Point, 
and $6,883.90 was so expended. 

During the latter part of the fiscal year 1906 it became apparent 
that the available balance would not complete the north jetty, as 
the bed of the ocean was scoured away along the jetty from a depth 
of 4 or 5 feet to a depth of 14 to 16 feet at low tide, and on May 8, 
1906, the estimated cost of completing the project, not including ex- 
penditures for maintenance, was increased to $306,200. 

Jetty construction was commenced in 1880 and completed in 1908, 
when the north jetty was extended to its project length of 1.575 feet. 
The south jetty reached its project length, 2,700 feet, in 1890. 

The total amount expended under this project was $351,192.75. of 
which $302,841.68 was for jetty construction, $6,883.90 for snagging 
the river, and $41,467.17 for maintenance. 

Both jetties are of high-tide rubblestone type, with their sea ends 
600 feet apart. They have caused the channel to straighten and 
locate away from dangerous rocks, and have increased the low-water 
depth on the bar from 3 feet to 10 feet. The mean range of tide is 
about 4.2 feet at Bandon, near the mouth. Coasting vessels can 
ascend the river to Coquille, about 25 miles above Bandon. Above 



APPENDIX. 1987 

this point the channel is available for smaller craft for a farther dis- 
tance of 12 miles, or to Myrtle Point. 

2. ENTRANCE TO COOS BAY AND HARBOR, OREG. 

The scope of previous projects for the improvement of the en- 
trance to Coos Bay and Harbor, Oreg., is as follows : 

The original project, adopted by the river and harbor act of March 
3, 1879, provided for the construction of a half -tide jetty from a 
point inside the entrance about 250 yards below Fossil Point on a line 
toward the east end of Coos Head, the structure to be of wood and 
stone, or stone, as should be found best, at an estimated cost of 
$600,000. The object of this jetty was to prevent accretion to the 
south end of the sand spit on the north side of the entrance and to 
open and maintain a deeper and more direct channel across the bar. 
A total of $213,750 was expended on this project and 1,761 feet of 
jetty constructed, when operations were suspended, July 21, 1890. 

The second project, adopted by the river and harbor act of Sep- 
tember 19, 1890, provided for increasing the depth across the bar 
to 20 feet by the construction of a north jetty 9,600 feet long and a 
slightlv converging south jetty 4,200 feet long, leaving an entrance 
width of about 1,500 feet, at an estimated cost of $2,466,412. The 
project also included the reclamation and holding of the sands of 
the North Spit. 

The projected depth was obtained by the construction of 9,520 feet 
of north jetty which was completed in 1894. From 1894 to 1901 
work under this project consisted of the restoration of jetty enrock- 
ment which had been beaten down by the sea. Jetty work was dis- 
continued in March, 1901, and in 1909 the balance of the appro- 
priation ($23,920.49) was applied to dredging the inner harbor as 
authorized by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1909. The total 
expenditure under this project is $721,720.76 of which $524,999.44 
was for jett^y construction, $172,800.83 for maintenance of jetty and 
other charges, and $23,920.49 for dredging in the inner harbor. In 
addition to the foregoing United States funds local interests ex- 
pended $21,270.41 for dredging. 

The reclamation of sand dunes of North Spit was commenced in 
1891 by planting 3 acres with Holland grass roots {Arunda arenaria). 
This work is in progress a portion of each year. At the end of the 
fiscal year 1914 about 720 acres of sand wastes of the North Spit had 
been reclaimed in this manner. The grass thrives and is very effec- 
tive in holding the drifting sands. To date the total expenditure for 
this work is about $7,200. (For information regarding reclamation 
of sand dunes, see Annual Eeport, 1890, p. 2947.) 

The third project, adopted by the river and harbor act of August 
18, 1894, provided for the construction of a small dipper dredge and 
two hopper scows to be used in dredging a channel 10 feet deep at 
mean lower low tide and 100 feet wide at the bottom through Marsh- 
field and Isthmus Slough Shoals at an estimated cost of $27,390. 

The river and harbor acts of August 18, 1894, and June 3, 1896, 
making appropriations for dredging Coos Bay, were amended by 
the sundry civil act of July 1, 1898, so as to dispense with the neces- 
sity of constructing the dredge and scows and permitted the work to 
be done by contract or otherwise. Conditions having changed con- 



1988 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

siderably between 1894 and 1898 the project was modified August 16, 
1898, to provide for dredging such shoals and removing such ob- 
structions in the upper part of the bay as constituted obstructions at 
that time instead of limiting the work to dredging. As the result of 
information obtained from a detailed survey of the north and west 
shores only, it was decided to dredge a channel 150 feet wide on the 
bottom and 13 feet deep at mean lower low water through Hogsback, 
Webster Point, and Stave Mill Shoals, and 100 feet wide at the bot- 
tom and 13 feet deep at mean lower low water through Bunker Shoal. 

Dredging was commenced in 1899 and completed the same year, 
most of the work being done under contract. At the close of opera- 
tions a least depth of 13 feet at mean lower low water had been 
obtained. After the completion of dredging shoals in Coos Bay, a 
shoal at the mouth of Pony Slough developed which made it neces- 
sary for loaded vessels to lighter in order to cross it. Allotments 
were made of $10,000 from the river and harbor act of June G, 1900, 
and $3,500 from the river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, for re- 
moving this shoal. The work was completed during the fiscal year 
1904-5, and a further allotment of $5,000 was made on May 17, 1905, 
for redredging the shoal opposite Marshfield. These latter funds 
were expended during the fiscal year 190G in dredging the channel 
to a depth of 13 feet throughout the entire length of the shoal. This 
work was commenced in September and completed in November, 
1905. 

The amount expended on dredging in Coos Bay since the adoption 
of the project of 1898 amounts to $45,4-20.51, of which $18,570.72 
was for maintenance. The project was finally completed and the 
balance on hand, $473.24, returned to the Treasury in 1906, as the 
maintenance of the channel was made a part of the improvement of 
Coos Bay and Harbor (general improvement). 

4. MOUTH OF SIUSLAW RIVER, OREG. 

The original project for improving the entrance to Siuslaw River, 
Oreg., was adopted by the river and harbor act of September 19, 
1890, which provided for the construction of two high-tide stone 
jetties, converging until the distance between them is about 500 feet, 
and then, if necessary, running out to sea parallel to each other for 
a sufficient distance to open and maintain a channel over the bar with 
a depth at low water of at least 10 feet. The estimated cost of con- 
structing 4.400 feet of north jetty and 3,800 feet of south jettv was 
$280,190. (See Annual Report "for 1891, p. 3174.) This estimate 
was found inadequate and it was decided to suspend work until Con- 
gress could be informed of the facts. A board of engineers was 
accordingly appointed to formulate a plan and make a new estimate 
of its cost. Upon recommendation of this board the .project was 
modified in 1891 to provide for the construction of two high-tide 
rubblestone jetties so located as to direct the currents on the ocean 
bar practically perpendicular to the coast, the jetties to converge 
until they are 000 feet apart at the crest of the bar; the north jetty 
to be 4,500 feet long with a 3,000-foot tramway approach to a wharf 
located under Cannery Hill, and the south jetty to be 3,200 feet long 
with a 2,400-foot tramway approach to a wharf located opposite 
Cannery Hill. By these jetties it was proposed to fix the bar chan- 



APPENDIX. 1989 

nel in its most desirable location and to increase the depth to 8 
feet at mean low tide. The project also provided that the north jetty 
should be constructed first, at least in part. The estimated cost of 
the work was $700,000. with no provision for maintenance. 

Preliminary work was commenced in 1S91 and active jetty con- 
struction in 1893. To June 30, 1901, the north jetty, including the 
tramway approach, had been completed for a distance of 4,090 feet, 
at a total cost of $151,700.83 for original work and $10,611.27 for 
maintenance, surveys, etc. This work resulted in somewhat checking 
the tendency of the bar channel to shift its position as far north 
as often occurred before the improvement was commenced. No work 
was done on the south jetty. 

The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, directed that a reexami- 
nation and survey be made of the river at its mouth and of the shoals 
near Florence, with a view to the adoption of a project to provide for 
its commerce at a less cost than the existing project. The Board of 
Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, to which the report was re- 
ferred, reported March 26, 1903. that in its opinion it was not desir- 
able to continue the improvement of the Siuslaw River with the view 
of obtaining a depth of 8 feet. Upon recommendation of the Chief 
of Engineers the Secretary of War suspended operations pending 
receipt of further instructions from Congress. Nothing was clone 
during the fiscal year 1901. The river and harbor act of March 3, 
1905, provided that the unexpended balance of appropriations should 
be returned to the Treasury, except that an amount might be retained 
sufficient for maintenance for two years. In accordance with this act 
construction work was discontinued and the serviceable plant dis- 
tributed among other works. The stipulated period of maintenance 
(two vears) having elapsed the balance remaining unexpended, 
$24,838, was returned to the Treasury in 1908 and the work 
abandoned. 

6. TILLAMOOK BAY AND BAR. OREG. 

The original project for the improvement of Tillamook Bay and 
Bar was adopted by the river and harbor act of August 11, 1888, 
which provided for a survey of the entrance and for the improve- 
ment of Dry Stocking Bar and Hoquarten Slough by building dikes, 
at an estimated cost of $5,200 and $150 annually for maintenance. 

Operations were commenced in 1890, and during the year 1,148.5 
feet of sheet pile dikes and 448.5 feet of pile and brush revetment 
work were built at Dry Stocking Bar, but the unprecedented freshets 
of the following winter and spring swept them away, so no results 
can be claimed for the work done. During that year a survey of the 
bar and entrance was made, and Hoquarten Slough was cleared of 
snags as far as Tillamook City. A survey of the entrance to Tilla- 
mook Bay was made in July, 1891, and the report thereon (see 
H. Doc. No. 35, 52d Cong., ist sess.) formed the basis for a new 
special project. The total amount expended on the foregoing work 
is $5,700, of which $964.45 was applied to maintenance. 

The second project, adopted by the river and harbor act of July 
13, 1892, provided for connecting the north and middle channels 
nearly opposite Bay City, on the north shore of Tillamook Bay, put- 
ting in dikes at Junction and Dry Stocking Bars, and contemplated a 



1990 REPORT OP THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

ieast depth of 9 feet at mean high tide from Hobsonville to Tilla- 
mook on Hoquarten Slough, at an estimated cost of $100,000. No 
provision was made for maintenance at this time, but in 1903 it was 
estimated that $10,000 would be required biennially to maintain the 
work. At this time it was also estimated that $0,000 would be re- 
quired to make certain changes in and additions to the plant. 

Preliminary operations were commenced in 1892 and actual con- 
struction in 1898. In 1895 the project was somewhat modified by 
providing for different works which were believed essential to accom- 
plish the desired end. The estimated cost remained as originally 
stated. The expenditures to June 30, 1897, $52,221.80, resulted in 
cutting a navigable channel through the sand and mud Hats separat- 
ing Bay City Channel from Garibaldi Channel, and in the following 
work designed to increase the How and depth of water in Garibaldi 
Channel and Hoquarten Slough so as to aid vessels to reach Tilla- 
mook City: The removal of snags and overhanging trees in Ho- 
quarten Slough as far up as Tillamook City; the construction of a 
dike across the head of Middle Channel; a dike across lower mouth 
of Kilchis River; a dike across the head of Old South Channel; 
a dike across the lower mouth of Wilson River ; a dike at Dry Stock- 
ing Bar; a dike across the head of South Fork of Trask River; a 
dike across the North Fork of Trask River; and excavating a chan- 
nel from the North Fork of Trask River to Hoquarten Slough, by 
means of which the waters of both forks of Trask River are emptied 
into Hoquarten Slough above Dry Stocking Bar. The foregoing 
work was done under contract. In 1899 operations consists I of 
keeping dikes free from drift and in preparing for active opera- 
tions as soon as funds Avere made available. In 1900 a snag scow, 
constructed under contract at a total cost of $2,720.90, including 
equipment, was placed in commission and operated by hired labor. 
During the year it removed snags from the Hoquarten Slough Chan- 
nel between Tillamook and Bay City, and dredged a 10-foot channel 
through Dry Stocking Bar and through a shoal in the channel oppo- 
site the old mouth of Wilson River, and at the close of the year was 
engaged in widening the channel opposite Bay City. 

Several spur dikes were also constructed under contract, the 
brush mattresses and rubblestone filling therefor also being supplied 
under contract. Miscellaneous repairs to dikes were also made. It 
was estimated that the various dikes and improved channels could 
be made practically permanent at a cost of $27,000. The operations 
during 1901 were in continuation of those in progress at the close 
of the previous fiscal year, and consisted of dredging shoals and 
constructing deflecting dikes in and along the selected channel lead- 
ing from Hobsonville to Tillamook City. A channel having the 
least depth of 9 feet at mean high tide from Hobsonville to Til la 
mook, as called for by the project was obtained, and the project 
completed in 1901. This work was discontinued August 18. L913, 
as the maintenance of this channel by local interests was made a 
condition of the present project. 

The total amount expended under this project to the end of the 
fiscal year 1915 was $143,007.39, distributed as follows: s7_'. !7: , ..:'.7 
for original work and $70,534.02 for maintenance, of which $476.95 
was expended during 1915 in caring for Government plant. 



APPENDIX. 1991 

7. NEHALEM BAY, OREG. 

The original project for improvement of Nehalem Bar and entrance 
to Nehalem Bay, Oreg., was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
September 19, 1890, which appropriated $10,000 for "commencement 
of jetty construction." The plan of improvement upon which this 
appropriation was based was to build two high-tide stone jetties con- 
verging until the distance apart is about 500 feet, and then, if neces- 
sary, running out to sea parallel to each other to such distance as will 
insure a low-water depth on the bar of at least 8 feet, the north jetty 
to rest on the end of the sandy peninsula and the south jetty upon the 
mainland, the object being to hold the channel in its northerly posi- 
tion. The estimated cost of this work was $325,927.50. 

As the amount of money appropriated was inadequate to com- 
mence operations, nothing was done except to make a reexamination 
of the harbor, plan, and estimates, which resulted in increasing the 
estimated cost to $712,388 in 1891. The amount expended for this 
work is $415.08. The balance of the appropriation was returned to 
the Treasury July 22, 1892, to be available whenever the work started. 

The river and harbor act of June 2, 1896, directed that a prelimi- 
nary examination be made " for modified plan, to be paid for out of 
money on hand." This survey was made in 1897 at a cost of $270.60 
and resulted in an unfavorable recommendation (Annual Report for 
1S98, p. 3009), after which the question of improvement appears to 
have been abandoned until the adoption of the present project by 
the river and harbor act of July 25, 1912. 

Operations under this project were confined to the two surveys 
mentioned. The total amount expended for this work is $685.68. 
The balance of the appropriation, $9,314.32, was returned to the 
Treasury. 

8. SNAKE RIVER, OREG, WASH., AND IDAHO. 

The improvement of Snake River has been associated with that 
of the Columbia River above Celilo Falls from 1876 until 1907, but 
no formal project for the Snake River was adopted by Congress 
prior to 1902. 

The project for the improvement of the Columbia River was begun 
in 1872, and in 1876, $15,000 was appropriated by Congress for the 
improvement of Columbia and Snake Rivers. Of this appropria- 
tion about $12,000 was spent at Pine Tree Rapids, on the Snake 
River, and in 1877 a project was formulated for the improvement of 
the upper Columbia and Snake Rivers. The project low-water depth 
was 5-| feet on the Columbia River and 4|- feet on the Snake River. 
Under this project very little work was done on the Columbia River, 
nearly all the monsy being spent on Snake River in removing rocks 
and bowlders from the channel under contract, at prices varying 
from $12 to $24.75 per cubic yard. Work was confined to the stretch 
of river between Riparia, Wash., and the mouth of the river, a dis- 
tance of 67 miles. All work previous to 1885 (except some work done 
at Umatilla Rapids in 1877) was done by contract. In 1885 a system 
of work was begun by the purchase of materials and hired labor, and 
this method, with few exceptions, has since been followed. 



1992 



REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 



Work under the project of 1877, by contract and day labor, below 
Kiparia is as follows: 



I/.alilv. 


Solid rock 

removed. 


Locality. 


S'olid rock 
removed. 




Cu. yds. 
2, S3* 
1,610 

!) 

137 

2, 152 


Simmon? Rapid No. 15 


Cv. yds. 
31 




11 






CM 


Monumental Rapids 

Pine Tree Rapids A. 




423 







In 1884 operations began on the river above Riparia, and work 
was done at Bishops Bar, Granite Point, Log Cabin Rapids, Little 
Goose Island, Deadmans Gulch, Almota, Kellys Bar, Truax Landing,. 
and Little Pine Tree Rapids. A total of 41G cubic yards of solid 
rock and bowlders were removed. 

Upon the completion of the railroad from Portland, Oreg., to the 
Snake River at Riparia, in 1888, river navigation was practically 
suspended below Riparia, and the work of improvement was confined 
to the river above Riparia. 

In 1892 a project was submitted for the construction of dikes and 
removal of bowlders between Riparia, Wash., and Lewiston. Idaho, 
at an estimated cost of $29,226. Two dikes were constructed under 
this project, one at Goose Island and one at Log Cabin Rapids, and 
some rocks were removed from the channel. 

There was expended on the projects previous to the adoption of 
the present project $16S.500. of which $15,089.74 was applied to 
maintenance. 

In addition to the foregoing, some work was done freeing the river 
of obstructions between Huntington, Oreg.. and the Seven Devils 
mining district. This work began in 1892. and in 1896 all of the 
Government plant on this portion of the river was sold and the river 
improvement abandoned. The estimated cost of this work was 
$80,000, and there was expended $40,500 on the project, with the 
removal of about 4,000 cubic yards of rock, when the work was aban- 
doned as not worthy of further improvement. 



0. COLUMBIA RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES ABOVE CELILO FALLS TO 
THE MOUTH OF SNAKE RIVER, OREG. AND WASH. 

The first allotment, $25,000. for improving Columbia River from 
Celilo Falls to Snake River was made in 18(17 and was used in making 
an examination and survey in September. 1867, and in experimental 
blasting in 1868 to determine the cost and advisability of undertaking 
improvement by this method. A 7-foot channel through John Day, 
Indian, Squally Hook, Umatilla. Rock Creek, and Iloinly Rapids 
was recommended, at an estimated cost of $132,328, with no pro- 
vision for maintenance. This plan was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of June 10, 1872, which appropriated $50,000 for the im- 
provement. The following quantities of solid rock were removed 
under contract: 



APPENDIX. 



1993 



Locality. 


Quantity. 


Locality. 


Qiuntity. 




Cu. yds. 
1,6)1 

960 

94 
308 




Cu. yds 

118 






67 


Devils l:'end Rapids .... 


Total 




2,598 









The contract price of this work varied from $50 to $24.75 per 
cubic yard. 

A total of $105,000 was appropriated and expended on this project 
in addition to the allotment of $25,000 made in 1867. 

The river and harbor act of August 14, 1876, appropriated $15,000 
for the improvement of upper Columbia and Snake Rivers, which is 
the first money appropriated for improving Snake River. Of this 
amount about $12,000 was spent on Pine Tree Rapids, in Snake 
River. The project was modified in 1877 to include Snake River, 
and, as modified, the project of 1877 contemplated a low-water depth 
of 5^ feet in the Columbia and 4| feet in the Snake, at an estimated 
cost of $132,000 for improvement. No provision was made for 
maintenance. Very little work was done on the Columbia River un- 
der this project, as the railroad from The Dalles, Oreg., to Wallula, 
Wash., along the south bank of the river, was completed in 1880, 
which reduced the importance of the river as a carrier and naviga- 
tion was then practically suspended. At Homly Rapids 156 cubic 
yards of rock and at Umatilla Rapids 100 cubic yards of solid rock 
was removed. All subsequent work under the project was done on 
the Snake River, and work on the Columbia River was not resumed 
until the adoption of the present project by the river and harbor act 
of March 2, 1907. 

10. COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN THE FOOT OF THE DALLES RAPIDS 
AND THE HEAD OF CELILO FALLS, OREG. AND WASH. 

The 'first project was adopted by the river and harbor act. of 
August 18, 1894, which appropriated $100,000 for the construction 
of a boat railway from the foot of The Dalles Rapids to the head 
of Celilo Falls, at an estimated cost of $2,264,467, including open 
river improvement of Threemile Rapids. An additional appropria- 
tion of $150,000 was made by the river and harbor act of June 3, 
1896. Up to June 30, 1899, no actual construction work for a boat 
railway had been done, but most of the right of way had been se- 
cured. It was then reported that the navigation interests preferred 
a portage railway or a canal and locks. The Secretary of War 
decided to defer further action in the matter until Congress definitely 
decided the question of constructing a boat railway. 

The river and harbor act of June 6, 1900, provided for an exami- 
nation of the river between the foot of The Dalles Rapids and head 
of Celilo Falls with a view to the construction of a canal and locks 
to overcome the obstructions to navigation. 

The report submitted under this act is printed (see Annual Report 
for 1901, p. 3502, no maps, and H. Doc. No. 228, 56th Cong., 2d sess., 
containing maps), and proposes the construction of a short canal and 
lodts around The Dalles or Fivemile Rapids, and another around 



1994 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

the falls at Celilo, with intermediate river improvement, at i»n esti- 
mated cost of $3,969,371. The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, 
adopted the project of improving the river from the foot of The 
Dalles Rapids to the head of Celilo Falls in accordance with the 
report, but provided that before entering upon the work an examina- 
tion should be made by a board of engineers with a view to modifying 
the project so as to diminish the cost of the improvement. 

Detailed surveys, made in 1903 under the direction of a board of 
engineers, resulted in the recommendation of the present project, 
which was adopted by the river and harbor act of March 3, 1905. 

The amount expended on previous projects prior to the adoption 
of the present project is $27,112.83. 

12. CANAL AT THE CASCADES, COLUMBIA RIVER, OREG. 

The river and harbor act of June 23, 1874, contained the following 
item : " Cascades and Dalles of Columbia, Oregon and Washington, 
for the purpose of ascertaining the practicability of constructing 
canals and locks at such points." 

A survey and estimate was made in the fall of 1874 for a canal 
around the Cascades in Oregon 2,G00 feet in length, three locks each 
40 by 215 feet, lift 7 feet each, draft of boats loaded 8 feet, at a cost 
of $700,000, including removal of rocks below the canal. The river 
and harbor act of August 14, 1876, appropriated $90,000 for the 
construction of a canal around the Cascades of the Columbia River 
in the State of Oregon. 

In 1877 an estimate was submitted for a canal of the following 
dimensions : 

Excavation through the plateau, 3,150 feet. 

Crib breakwater 65 feet high from lower end of canal, 4,050 feet. 

Total length, including breakwater, 7,200 feet. 

Width of cutting at surface, low water, 5S feet. 

Depth at low water, 50 feet. 

Depth at low water over miter sill, 8 feet. 

Depth at extreme high water over miter sill, 68 feet. 

Two locks, 46 by 250, 8 feet on sills. 

Estimate for canal navigable at all stages, $1,544,545. 

Estimate for canal navigable to 25-foot stage, $1,18S,S60. 

On September 24, 1877, the foregoing plans were approved by a 
board of engineer officers, but a size of 50 by 300 feet was recom- 
mended for the locks. In 1878 the width was increased to 70 feet. 

Work under this project began in October, 1878, when a contract 
was let for the excavation of both locks and a part of the canal. 
The project was modified in 1880 by a board that recommended one 
lock 462 by 90 feet, to accommodate one towboat and three barges, 
with lift of about 24 feet and a gate opening of 70 feet. A guard 
gate was to be provided at the head and foot of the canal. A modifi- 
cation was made in 1888 for lock capacity of 462 by 90 feet in the 
clear, 8 feet on the sill, with gate span the full width of the lock and 
lockage to 20- foot stage of river. The upper guard gate was to be 
placed at a lock's distance above the upper gate to act as an upper 
gate for a second lock. 

Operations had been carried on by hired labor for the canal proper 
and for open-river work, but some open-river work was done by con- 



APPENDIX. 1995 

tract. The canal work was suspended for a time to await its effect 
on the low-water level of the river. Open-river work was prac- 
tically completed in 1883. 

In 1890 plans with revised estimate were submitted. The plans 
were in accordance with the approved project and the revised esti- 
mate of $3,623,000. 

The river and harbor act of July 13, 1892, appropriated $326,350 
for continuing the canal work and provided for contracts to complete 
the work. On January 23, 1893, a contract was made for the com- 
pletion of the work, and hired-labor work was discontinued. 

14. COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN VANCOUVER, WASH., AND THE 
MOUTH OF WILLAMETTE RIVER. 

The original project for improving Columbia River between Van- 
couver, Wash., and the mouth of Willamette River, adopted by the 
river and harbor act of July 13, 1892, provided for constructing a 
pile, brush, and rubblestone dike about 3,000 feet long, to a height 
of 4 feet above low water, from the Oregon shore to the head of 
Hayden Island, opposite Vancouver, in order to stop the flow south of 
the island during low-water stages, deflect it down the main channel, 
and scour out the troublesome shoals, and thus provide a channel 
depth of 20 feet or more. The estimated cost of the improvement was 
$33,000. No provision was made for maintenance. 

The entire amount was appropriated by the river and harbor act 
of July 13, 1892, and work was commenced the same year. This 
was continued under contract until April, 1S93, when all but 60 feet 
of the dam, being the portion next to the island, was completed. At 
this time the river rose, submerging the dam and island, and when 
the water receded the gap between the island and dam was found to 
have increased to 470 feet by erosion from the island. The balance 
of the appropriation then remaining being insufficient to close the 
gap, no further work was undertaken except to thoroughly revet the 
head of the island with stone and brush, with a view to preventing 
further scour, as the island is composed of sand and silt. 

This revetment was completed before another rise in the river 
occurred, but notwithstanding the revetment the erosion continued 
until in 1895 the gap was TOO feet wide and in the deepest portion 
had a low- water depth of about 30 feet. (The amount expended on 
the foregoing improvement to June 30, 1896, was $32,994.80.) This 
resulted in the project being modified by the river and harbor act 
of June 3, 1896, which provided for completing the improvement 
by extending the dam 1,500 feet downstream, thus forming a de- 
flecting dike, the extension to continue 4 feet above low water. The 
dike work was to be supplemented by dredging the shoals which 
then obstructed navigation, and thus open a channel 150 feet wide and 
20 feet deep at low water. The estimated cost of this improvement 
was $67,000. No provision was made for maintenance as it was 
believed the increased current, caused by the deflecting dike, could 
be relied upon for its maintenance. The river and harbor act of 
June 3, 1896, appropriated this sum. Nothing was done during the 
fiscal year 1897, as the river did not reach a stage sufficiently low- 
to permit working on the dam to advantage. On November 16, 



1996 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

1807. a contract was entered into for furnishing all labor and ma- 
terials required to make the necessary repairs to the then existing 
dam; to construct about 1,500 feet of dam, with its top about 6 feet 
above low water, from the end of the then-existing dam to the head 
of Hayden Island; to construct across the bend of the island about 
700 feet of cross dams from the new portion of the main dam. and 
to construct about 800 feet of shore revetment at the head of the 
island. Operations were begun by the contractor December 20, 1897, 
and completed April 9, 1898. The amount expended for this work 
was $25,208.83. 

Immediately after the completion of the work it was submerged 
by the usual summer rise in the Columbia River. In October, lv.'s, 
after the high water receded, an examination of the head of the 
island and the main and cross dikes was made, when it was found 
that all of the main dike, excepting about 500 feet of its down- 
stream (west) end, was in good condition, but that the two cross 
dikes connecting the head of the island with the main dike had been 
carried almost entirely away and that a portion of the head of the 
island had also been carried away. On November 7. 1898, the Chief 
of Engineers authorized the extension of the main dike downstream 
(along the north side of the head of the island) about 700 feet, the 
construction of two cross dikes (of stronger construction than those 
built in 1897-98) connecting the proposed 700-foot extension of the 
main dike with the head of the island and the revetment of the head 
of the island to prevent erosion. The estimated cost of the work 
was $16,000. Operations under the contract commenced January 
24. 1899. As the work progressed it was found that $16,000 would 
not be sufficient to complete the work, and this estimate was accord- 
ingly increased on March 1, 1899, to $25,516, or $9,516 in excess of 
the former amount. 

The usual summer rise in the Columbia River set in immediately 
after the completion of the work, May 2, 1899. and it remained 
submerged until the fall of 1899. when an examination was made. 
This examination disclosed the fact that the shore revetment on the 
head of the island, designed to prevent erosion, had been only \ cry 
slightly damaged at an unimportant place by the summer's floods. 
The main dike and two cross dikes were found to be in as good con- 
dition as when completed. May 2, 1899, with the exception that the 
brush and rubblestone filling in places had slightly settled, permit- 
ting the passage of currents through such places, which would cause 
damage unless stopped. On October 12. 1899, the Chief of Engineers 
authorized the placing of a small quantity of riprap shore protec- 
tion on the head of Hayden Island and the placing of additional 
brush and rubblestone filling in the main and cross dikes to com- 
pensate for the settlement that had been caused by the high water of 
the summer of 1899. Operations under contract commenced Novem- 
ber 3, 1899, and were completed March 19. 1900. and resulted in put- 
ting all portions of the work in excellent condition. 

During September-October. 1S!)«). a survey was made to determine 
whether the dredging provided for in the project would be necessary 
and. if so, where it should be done. This survey showed that the 
slough south of the island had shoaled throughout, and very 
markedly in many places, at some points as much as 10 feet, with 
but little change in the main channel north of the island. The effect 



APPENDIX. 1997 

that the dike had toward scouring a channel 20 feet deep through 
the obstructing bars north of the island (up to the time the survey 
was made in 1899) may be said to be but little, if any. However, the 
dike had been completed only five or six months when that survey 
was made, and it is not believed, therefore, that the results shown by 
this survey may be properly accepted as representing the ultimate 
effect of the dike upon the shoals in the main channel. 

The expenditures to June 30, 1900, were $85,533.16 for works of 
improvement up to May 2, 1899; and $9,007.82 for maintenance of 
improvement from May 2, 1899, to June 30, 1900; or a total of 
$94,540.98; and resulted in completing the dike and revetting the 
head of Hayden Island to prevent erosion. 

On June 18, 1901, $8,000 was allotted from the appropriation of 
June 6, 1900, for emergencies in river and harbor works, to be ap- 
plied to repairing the dike during the low-water period of the 
autumn of 1901. The materials Avere purchased and placed in the 
work under a contract dated November 8, 1901 ; operations being 
completed March 4, 1902, and the dike and revetment left in excellent 
repair. 

During the fiscal year 1903 about 635 cubic yards of rubblestone 
was placed in the main dike at several places to compensate for 
settlement caused by the high water of the summer of 1902. The 
stone was purchased and placed in the dike under an emergency con- 
tract. 

All work in connection with this project was completed in 1903. 
The construction work was completed May 2, 1899. 

The amount expended under this project, as modified bv the river 
and harbor act of June 3, 1896, was $109,440.99, of which $85,532.16 
was for improvement, and $23,908.83 for maintenance. These ex- 
penditures resulted in completing the dike and in revetting the head 
of Hayden Island to prevent erosion. No dredging was done. 

The present project was adopted by the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1905. (See H. Doc. No. 56, 58th Cong., 2d sess.) 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE SECOND PORT- 
LAND, OREG., DISTRICT. 



1. WILLAMETTE RIVER ABOVE PORTLAND AND YAMHILL RIVER, 

OREG. 

The original project for improving the Willamette River above 
Portland (Annual Eeport for 1871, p. 905), provided for the re- 
moval of snags, stumps, bowlders, and overhanging trees, the con- 
struction of training walls and the scraping of shoal bars, with a 
view to rendering possible continuous navigation for light-draft 
steamboats between Portland and Eugene, 172 miles, at an estimated 
cost of $16,000. (A canal and locks affording a low-water depth of 
3 feet were constructed around Willamette Falls by private enter- 
prise in the years 1870-1872.) The original appropriation under 
this project was made in the river and harbor act of March 3. 1871. 
The project was modified by the river and harbor act of July 13, 



1998 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

1892, to include removal of obstructions in the Yamhill River to 
McMinnville on the south fork of the river, 18 miles above its mouth, 
at an estimated cost of $3,000. Work under this project and its 
modification consisted largely in removing obstructions as required 
by the immediate necessities of commerce and resulted in an increase 
of navigability at all stages. The total expended on this project and 
its modification was $247,747.51, all of which may be regarded as 
having been applied to new work. 

5. COLUMBIA AND LOWER WILLAMETTE RIVERS BELOW PORTLAND, 

OREG. 

The original project for the improvement of the Columbia and 
Lower Willamette Rivers from Portland to the sea was approved 
by the Chief of Engineers May 21, 1877. (Annual Report for 1877, 
p. 1019.) The first appropriation expended under this project was 
made in the river and harbor act of June 18, 1878. The project con- 
templated obtaining a depth of 20 feet at low water by means cf 
dams, dikes, and revetments, and the estimated cost was $298,974. 
Prior to the adoption of this project funds appropriated by the river 
and harbor acts of 1866 to 1876, inclusive, were expended in dredging 
various bars for temporary relief. 

This project was modified by the river and harbor act of July 13, 
1892 (H. Doc. No. 38, 52d Cong., 1st sess.), to provide for obtaining 
a channel 25 feet deep at low water at an estimated cost of S77-_ ; .4('»i. 
The request of the Port of Portland Commission, a corporation exist- 
ing under the laws of the State of Oregon, to assist in the work, was 
approved by the Secretary of War October 19, 1891. 

The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, adopted a further proj- 
ect for securing by contraction works and dredging a 25-foot chan- 
nel to the sea. (H. Doc. No. 673, 56th Cong., 1st sess., and Annual 
Report for 1900, p. 4418.) The estimated cost was $2,796,300 (in- 
cluding $175,000 for dredge) and $50,000 annually for maintenance. 

The river and harbor act of June 25, 1910, provided that so much 
of the amount appropriated therein as might be necessary should be 
expended in dredging the west channel at Swan Island for use of 
log tows and shoal-water boats. Between April and July. 1911. this 
channel was dredged to a depth of 8 feet at low water and a width of 
300 feet. 772,800 cubic yards of sand and 500 linear feet of the Swan 
Island Dike being removed, all at a cost of $32,288.40. 

Operations by the United States under the original project and its 
modifications consisted in the construction of dams at Swan Island 
Chute, Willamette Slough, and ether sloughs in the Willamette River 
near its mouth, and of dikes at St. Helens and Martins Island, of 
dams at Burke Slough and Martins Slough in the Columbia River, 
in the construction of bank protection at Coon Island at the mouth 
of the Willamette, and in dredging. Dredging was done at Flavel, 
Smith Point. Sylvia De Grasse, Upper Sands. Taylor Sands. Tongue 
Point (Hogs Back), No. 2 Beacon. Harrington Point, and Pillar 
Rock liars in the estuary (13,596,091 cubic yards) : Skamokawa, 
Puget Island, Coffee Island, Eureka, Walker Island. La Du, Slaugh- 
ters, Rainier, Dobelbowers, Hunters. Martin Island, St. Helens, Hen- 
rici, and Willow Bars in the Columbia above -the estuary (7,820,808 



APPENDIX. 1999 

cubic yards), and in the Willamette River at the mouth, Postoffice 
and Swan Island upper and lower bars (1,894,448 cubic yards) ; 
total. 23,311.347 cubic yards. 

Operations by the port of Portland under the original project 
and its modifications consisted in the construction of dikes at St. 
Johns and Postoffice Bars in the Willamette River and at Walkers 
Island. Snag Island, and Cathlamet Bay in the Columbia River, and 
in dredging the channel at Swan Island and Postoffice Bar in the 
Willamette River and at the mouth of the Willamette, at St. Helens, 
Martins Island, Walkers Island, and in Cathlamet Bay in the Colum- 
bia River. The total quantity of material removed was about 
18,187,000 cubic yards. 

Operations by the United States and the port of Portland resulted 
in obtaining from time to time at all the various bars the depths 
called for by the original project and its modifications respectively. 
The depths thus obtained were subject to reductions due to the de- 
posit of material by the annual freshets, and the bars had to be re- 
dredged periodically for maintenance. 

The total expenditure by the port of Portland for dike construc- 
tion and dredging was about $995,588. 

The amount expended by the United States for relief dredging 
from 1866 to 1876, inclusive, was $-221,780.46. The amount expended 
on the original or 20-foot project (1877-1892) was $649,805. 97. The 
amount expended on the 25-foot project (1892-1912), including 
$132,284.24 applied to redredging channels and repairing revetments 
during the fiscal year 1913, was $1,768,020.54. The total amount 
expended on work under the original project and its modifications, 
including the amount expended for relief dredging prior to 1877, 
was $2,639,606.97, of which $1,448,651.45 was applied to new work 
and $1,190,955.52 to maintenance. 

6. MOUTH' OF COLUMBIA RIVER. OREG. AND WASH, 

The original project (S. Doc. No. 13, 47th Cong.. 2d sess., and 
Annual Report for 1883, p. 2011) was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of July 5, 1884, and contemplated obtaining a channel 
across the bar 30 feet deep at mean lower low water by the construc- 
tion of a jetty 4^ miles in* length extending seaward from Point 
Adams, on the south side of the entrance, and terminating at a point 
about 3 miles south of Cape Disappointment. The jetty was to rise 
to the level of low tide and was to be built of rubblestone on a foun- 
dation of brush mattress. The point of beginning was about 450 feet 
north of the northerly salient of old Fort Stevens. The estimated 
cost was $3,710,000. In 1893 it was decided to raise the jetty to 
high water at its inner end, sloping thence to elevation 4 feet above 
mean lower low water at its outer end, and to build four groins from 500 
to 1,000 feet in length on the north side of the jetty, as recommended 
in the report of a board of engineers dated May 27, 1893. (Annual 
Report for 1893, p. 3489.) Active operations covered the period 
from April, 1885, to October, 1895. The completed jetty was 4-J 
miles long, and, including groins and shore protection, contained 
945.923 tons of stone. The shore revetment is 3,955 feet long and 
extends from the root of the jetty along the low -water line of Point 



2000 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

Adams to a point about 1,300 feet southeast of the receiving wharves. 
The total expended on this project was $1,908,753.14 for new work, 
prior to which $17,500 had been appropriated and expended for 
survey, etc. 

As completed, the profile of the jetty was that recommended by the 
board of 1893 — that is, 12 to 10 feet high above mean lower low 
water for a distance of 1.8 miles from shore, thence sloping to 4 feet 
above datum at the outer end. By June 30, 189G, the outer 1.500 feet 
had been beaten down to low water, and the jetty suffered further 
damage from time to time until it was rebuilt under the present 
project. 

When work on the south jetty began the best channel across the 
bar was 20 feet deep and ran nearly north and south through a point 
about a mile west of the projected outer end of that jetty. As thg 
jetty was extended the channel deepened and shifted to the west 
In 1890 the governing depth was 24 feet: in 1891, 28 feet; in 1892, 
1893, and 1894. 29 feet; in 1895, 31 feet; in 1896 and 1897, 30 feet; 
and in 189S, 29 feet. In 1899 it was 28 feet deep and its directum 
had shifted to the northwest. It continued to shift and to shoal, 
and by 1902 all traces of a channel had disappeared and a governing 
depth of 20 to 22 feet was found over the whole westerly ana 
southerly portions of the bar. 

7. CLATSKANIE RIVER, OREG. 

The original project (H. Doc. No. 218, 55th Cong., 2d sess., and 
Annual Report for 1898, p. 3049) was adopted by the river and har- 
bor act of March 3, 1899. It contemplated cuttting new channels 
across two bends and dredging a channel 6 feet in depth at low 
water, with a bottom width of 40 feet, from the mouth to Clatskanie, 
about 3 miles, at an estimated cost of $13,000. The work contem- 
plated was completed in 1902, 55,864 cubic yards having been re- 
moved. This resulted in giving a depth of 5 feet at low water over 
the shoalest places and in making the channel shorter by 4,050 feet 
and easier of navigation. The total expended on this work was 
$12,075.47, of which $11,807.37 was for new work and $808.10 for 
maintenance. 

8. COWLITZ AND LEWIS RIVERS, WASH. 

(a) COWLITZ RIVER, WASH. 

The original project (S. Doc. No. 34, 40th Cong., 2d sess.. and 
Annual Report for 18S0, p. 2331) was adopted by the river and har- 
bor act of June 14, 1880. It provided for the removal of snags, 
drift, and other obstructions between the mouth and Cowlitz Land- 
ing, now Toledo, 37 miles, at an estimated cost of $5,000 for the first 
year and $2,000 annually thereafter for maintenance. Operations 
were earned on under this project between 1880 and 1910, when the 
present project was adopted, and resulted in obtaining and maintain- 
ing a channel 14 inches deep at low water in the shoalest plaees. 
The total expended on this work was $53,182.93, of which $4,999 was 
for new work and $48,183.93 for maintenance. 



APPENDIX. 2001 

(b) lewis river, wash. 

The original project (H. Doc. No. 64, 55th Cong., 1st sess., and 
Annual Eeport for 1897, p. 3473) was adopted by the river and har- 
bor act of March 3, 1899. It provided for snagging, dike construc- 
tion, and dredging, with a view to obtaining a depth of 6 feet at low 
water between the mouth and the forks, 3i£ miles, and 4 feet in the 
East Fork to La Center, 6^ miles above the mouth, at an estimated 
cost of $20,460 for new work. 

This project was modified by the river and harbor act of June 13, 
1902, to include the improvement of the North Fork, for which no 
estimate of cost had previously been made. Operations under the 
original project and its modifications resulted in a channel about 4 
feet deep at low water to the forks, about 18 inches deep from the 
forks to La Center on the East Fork, 2^ feet deep from the forks to 
Woodland on the North Fork, and thence 1 foot deep to Runyon, 
the head of navigation, 23 miles above Woodland. These depths are 
not materially greater than the original ones, but the channel Avas 
made easier of navigation and the navigable period lengthened. The 
total amount expended was $30,350, of which $22,251.62 was for new 
work and $8,098.38 for maintenance. 



HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE SEATTLE, 
WASH., DISTRICT. 



1. WILLAPA RIVER AND HARBOR, WASH. 

This improvement includes Willapa River and Harbor, the North 
River which enters Willapa Harbor on the north side, and the Nasel 
River which enters Willapa Harbor on the south side. 

The original project for the improvement of Willapa River and 
Harbor was adopted by the river and harbor act of July 13, 1892, 
and plan and estimate are published in the Annual Report of the 
Chief of Engineers for 1891, pages 3264-3271. The project was to 
provide a channel 100 feet wide and 8 feet deep at low water from 
deep water in Willapa Bay to Willapa City, a distance of about 24 
miles, by dredging at the bars and the construction of dikes across 
the head of Mailboat Slough, near South Bend, and Lauderbach 
Slough, near Willapa City, to concentrate the current in the main 
channel. The act adopting the project appropriated $18,000, the 
river and harbor act of August 18, 1894, $13,500, and the river and 
harbor act of March 3, 1899, $5,000 for the work, which was com- 
menced under contract in 1892 and completed in 1896. A channel of 
project dimensions was obtained. 

The river and harbor act of August 18, 1894, authorized the ex- 
penditure of- not to exceed $2,500 of the appropriation for improving 
Willapa River and Harbor, Wash., in the removal of a log jam in the 
North River. A description of the jam is published in the Annual 
Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1896, pages 3330-3332. This 
jam was removed by contract in 1896, but re-formed and was again 
8373°— eng 1915 126 



2002 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

removed in 1897. The accumulation of snags narrowed the cnnnnel, 
and the river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, authorized the ex- 
penditure of so much of the balance of appropriation as might be 
necessary in thoroughly removing the obstruction. This work was 
done by hired labor in the fall of 1899, and the channel through the 
jam completely cleared to a width of 85 feet. 

The river and harbor act of July 13, 1892. appropriated $1,500 
for snagging the Nasel River. This work was done by hired labor 
and plant, and was completed on September 15, lsi>± The river and 
harbor act of June 13, 1902, authorized the expenditure of any bal- 
ance available from the appropriation previously made for improv- 
ing Willapa River and Harbor to snagging or otherwise improving 
the North and Nasel Rivers. Under this authority the Nasel River 
was again snagged from its mouth to Nasel Landing. 

The river and harbor act of March 2, 1907. adopted the project 
published in House Document No. -477, Fifty-ninth Congress, first 
session, which contemplated a channel 150 feet wide and 12 feet deep 
at mean lower low water through the shoals between South Bend 
and Raymond, a distance of 3 miles. The estimated cost was $25,000, 
which amount was appropriated by the act adopting the project. 
This project was completed by dredging under contract. The work 
commenced in November, 1907, and was completed in February, 1908. 

The amount expended under the above projects was $56,798. 1 1 for 
improvement and $4,316.02 for maintenance, making a total of 
$61,114.46. In addition $1,500 appropriated by the river and harbor 
act of July 13, 1892, for snagging the Nasel River was expended. 

On the completion of the projects the available depths at mean 
lower low water were 16 feet to South Bend. 12 feet to Raymond, and 
8 feet to Willapa City. North and Nasel Rivers, which are used 
mostly for floating saw logs, had been cleared of snags and log jams, 
and light-draft boats could ascend these streams for varying dis- 
tances, depending upon the stages of the tides. 

3. GRAYS HARBOR (INNER PORTION) BETWEEN ABERDEEN AND 

THE ENTRANCE TO SAID HARBOR, AND CHEHALIS RIVER. WASH. 

The original project for Chehalis River, printed in Annual Report 
of the Chief of Engineers for 1882, pages 2687-2690, was adopted 
by the river and harbor act of August 2, 1882, and contemplated the 
annual removal of snags and log jams as far as Claquato, 82 miles 
from the mouth. The estimated cost of the first removal was $5,000. 
Appropriations amounting to $19,000 were made for this work- by 
the river and harbor acts of 1882. 1884, 1886. 1890, L896, and L899. 
The log jams were removed in 1884. and snagging was done by hired 
labor and plant during low-water stages each season. 

The river and harbor act of July 13, 1892, adopted a project for 
Grays Harbor (inner portion) and Chehalis River (Annual Report 
for 1891, p. 3297), which contemplated a channel 200 feet wide and 
16 feet deep at mid-tide, as far as Mbntesano, to be secured by dredg- 
ing the shoals and constructing 'likes to concentrate the flow of the 
river in the north channel. The estimated cost of this work was 
$150,000. The river and harbor act of July 13, L892, appropriated 
$50,000 for this work, and the river and harbor act of 1894, $25,000. 
Work of dike construction was commenced under contract in 1893 



APPENDIX. * 2003 

and completed in 1895. The work under this project was suspended 
in 1896, and the balance of the appropriation turned into the Treas- 
ury. No dredging was done. The river and harbor act of June 13, 
1902, appropriated $50,000, and the river and harbor act of March 

3, 1905, $30,000 for continuing the improvement of the inner harbor 
and Chehalis River and the two projects were consolidated. Dikes 
were repaired, and a channel 100 feet wide and 15 feet deep at low 
water was obtained through the Cow Point Shoal and the shoal 
below Hoquiam. This work was commenced under contracts in 1903 
and completed in 1905, as far as funds would permit. The total 
amount expended on the inner harbor and Chehalis River, under the 
above projects, was $113,134.38 for improvement and $37,415.45 for 
maintenance of dikes and snagging, making a total of $150,549.83. 
On completion of work on these projects a maximum draft of 11 
feet at mean lower low water could be carried to Cosmopolis and 5-J- 
feet to Montesano. Above Montesano the river had been kept free 
from snags and jams. 

5. PUGET SOUND AND ITS TRIBUTARY WATERS, WASH. 

The original project, adopted by act of Congress of August 2, 1882, 
had the title " Improvement of Skagit, Stilaguamish, Nooksack, 
Snohomish, and Snoqualmie Rivers, Wash." Under date of August 

4, 1892, the change to the new title was approved and all money and 
property on hand were transferred and thereafter accounted for 
under the new title. The original project contemplated clearing and 
maintaining the navigable portions of the streams named free from 
snags, debris, and drift. This work was accomplished by means of 
a shallow-draft, stern-wheel snag boat constructed for this purpose. 
Under this project, to June 30, 1892, $67,495.58 was expended for 
maintenance. 

8. WATERWAY CONNECTING PUGET SOUND WITH LAKES UNION AND 
WASHINGTON, WASH. 

The original project for this work was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of August 18, 1894, and provided : 

For dredging Salmon Bay and the improvement of the waterway connecting 
the waters of Puget Sound, at Salmon Bay, with Lakes Union and Washington 
by enlarging the said waterway into a ship canal, with the necessary locks and 
appliances in connection therewith, $25,000: Provided, That no part of said 
amount shall be expended on the improvement of the waterway connecting 
the waters of Puget Sound with Lakes Union and Washington until the entire 
right of way and a release from all liability to adjacent property owners have 
been secured to the United States free of cost and to the satisfaction of the 
Secretary of War. 

On March 1, 1898, a board of Engineer officers was appointed to 
consider and report on the most feasible route for the waterway. 
The report of the board was submitted March 23, 1898, and recom- 
mended that the waterway enter Puget Sound through Shilshole 
Bay, and that the outer lock be located at the foot of Salmon Bay. 
The recommendations of the board were approved and this route 
was adopted by the Secretary of War on April 14, 1898. 

The act of March 2, 1895, required the preparation of a map show- 
ing each piece of property required to be deeded to the United States 



2004 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

or from which a release was required. This map was prepared, and 
on June 22, 1900, the right of way was accepted by the Secretary of 
War from King County, Wash., as satisfactory to the United States. 
The original project was modified by the river and harbor act of 
June 13, 1902, which provided as follows: 

Improving waterway connecting Puget Sound with Lakes Union and Wash- 
ington, Wash.: Continuing improvement, $160,000: Provided, That this appro- 
priation, together with the unexpended balance to the credit of said Improve- 
ment, shall be expended in securing, by dredging, a low-water channel 10 feet 
in depth from Shilshole Bay through Salmon Pay to the wharves at Ballard: 
Provided further, That a board of Engineers shall be appointed by the Secretary 
of War, who shall make such surveys, examinations, and Investigations as may 
be required to determine the feasibility and advisability of constructing a 
canal, with necessary locks and dams, connecting Puget Sound with Lakes 
Union and Washington, of sufficient width and depth to accommodate the 
largest commercial and naval vessels, and said board shall prepare and report 
plans and estimates of the cost thereof. Said board shall also examine the 
route for a similar canal connecting Elliott Bay with Lakes Washington and 
Union, with a view to determine the feasibility of such route, and shall invite 
proposals from the Seattle & Lake Washington Waterway Co. for the con- 
struction of a similar canal over said route connecting Elliott Bay with Lake 
Washington, and similar proposals for connecting Elliott Bay with Lake Union 
through Lake Washington, said proposals to specify the time for the com- 
pletion of each project, and all rights and privileges to be reserved by said 
company. Said board shall also report upon the relative advantages of all pro- 
posed routes. Nothing herein shall be construed as the adoption of any project 
for the construction of a waterway connecting Puget Sound with Lakes Union 
and Washington. Said board shall make its reports as above provided for to 
the next session of Congress. 

The report of the board was adverse to the construction of a canal 
of the dimensions proposed. 

. With funds provided by the river and harbor acts of August 18, 
1894, and June 3, 1896, excavation of the canal was commenced in 
1901. By the removal of 1,063,251 cubic yards of material there was 
obtained a channel 75 feet wide and 16 feet deep at extreme low water 
from deep water in Shilshole Bay to the lower lock site, a distance of 
6,000 feet; thence 4,000 feet a channel 75 feet wide and 10 feet deep 
at extreme low water to the city wharf at Ballard, with a turning 
basin varying from 175 to 500 feet at the inner end; and thence a cut 
10 feet wide on the bottom, with its bottom 6 feet above extreme low 
tide, from the head of Salmon Ba} 7 to Lake Union, a distance of about 
4,500 feet. Regulating gates were installed at the outlet of Lake 
Union and at the Portage (between Lake Union and Lake Washing- 
ton). The Portage cut. excavated by private capital in 1886 was 
enlarged, and at the latter point two 30-inch siphons were installed 
to regulate the flow from Lake Washington. 

In 1906 a movement was started for the construction of a canal 
with local funds, and an act of Congress approved June 11. L906, 
authorized James A. Moore or his assigns to construct a canal, with 
locks, along the Government right of way. This act was modified 
by the act of March 2, 1907, so as to permit Mr. Moore or his assigns 
to commute the work required under the previous act to excavation 
alone of a canal from deep water in Puget Sound to deep water in 
Lake Washington. The same act directed a survey and estimate of 
cost of a single lock and a report as to what contribution, if any, 
local interests would make toward its construction. 

By an act of the Legislature of the State of Washington approved 
March 16, 1907, a new right of way 500 feet wide through the State 



APPENDIX. 2005 

lands lying between Lakes Union and Washington was granted to the 
United States. 

Under an act of its legislature approved March 17, 1909, the State 
of Washington created a shore-land improvement fund and appro- 
priated out of said funct the sum of $250,000, to be expended under 
the supervision of the district engineer officer, toward the construc- 
tion of the Lake Washington Canal. With funds provided by this 
act and disbursed by the district officer, excavation of 161,917 cubic 
yards of material resulted in a cut between Lakes Union and Wash- 
ington 2,000 feet long, from to 50 feet deep, 75 to 80 feet wide on 
the bottom, side slopes 1 horizontal on 4 vertical, and with bottom 
sloping from 40 Engineer datum at Lake Washington end to plus 25 
Engineer datum on Lake Union end. Zero Engineer datum is ex- 
treme low tide, Puget Sound, at Ballard, Wash. 

The rights granted to James A. Moore by the act of June 11, 1906, 
modified by the act of March 2, 1907, were transferred by him to the 
Lake Washington Canal Association, a corporation created for the 
purpose of taking over Mr. Moore's rights and cooperating with the 
assessment district in carrying out the work proposed to be done by 
local agencies. This association in turn transferred the rights to 
King County, Wash. 

9. SNOHOMISH RIVER, WASH. 

The original project for this improvement was made under the 
title of Everett Harbor, Wash., and was adopted by the river and 
harbor act of August 18, 1894. The plan of improvement published 
in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1893, pages 3464 
to 3467, and Senate Executive Document No. 139, part 2, Fifty-third 
Congress, second session, provided for a harbor basin in front of the 
Everett Peninsula 200 feet wide, 5,300 feet. long, and 26 feet deep at 
mean lower low water, and a navigable and inlet channel 100 feet 
wide and 6 feet deep at mean lower low water from the end of the 
basin around the peninsula to the head of Old River, the material 
excavated in making the basin and channel to be deposited behind a 
dike or bulkhead of piles and brush, built from the lower end of 
Smiths Island to the south end of the basin and upon high land and 
behind existing dikes along the other portion of the channel and 
Old River. The estimated cost of the work was $372,000. 

By the river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, the estimated cost 
of the improvements was increased to $422,000. 

By authority of joint resolution of Congress approved April 23, 
1902, the work in Old River was discontinued, and the further ex- 
penditure of funds has been for deepening and widening the harbor 
basin and channel through the tide flats and repairing the bulkheads. 

The amount expended on this project to June 30, 1910, was $417,- 
577.77, of which $2,867.73 was for maintenance and $3,000.90 for 
purchase of quariy at Goat Island. 

A dike for the purpose of retaining the dredged material has been 
built from the lower end of Smiths Island along the established bulk- 
head line for a distance of 19,336 feet. At the southern end of this 
work an outside bulkhead 200 feet from the other has been built for 
a distance of 2,600 feet. These dikes were repaired, raised, and 
strengthened. The channel leading north from the basin was dredged 



2006 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, TJ. S. ARMY. 

to a depth of 6 feet at low water for a distance of 6,000 feet. A 
channel in the Old River was partly dredged for a distance of 11. GOO 
feet downstream before this part of the work was discontinued 
under the resolution of Congress above referred to. The harbor basin 
was dredged for a length of 5,500 feet and for a width of 400 feet 
and a depth of 26 feet at mean low water. This basin has almost 
completely filled up. In the upper portion it was necessary to dredge 
the channel over 1,000 feet in length in order to obtain a depth of 
8 feet at mean lower low water. 

10. SKAGIT RIVER, WASH. 

The Skagit River has been improved to the extent of removing 
snags and similar obstructions to navigation since 1882 under appro- 
priations for the operation of a snag boat on Puget Sound and its 
tributary waters. 

12. BELLINGHAM HARBOR, WASH. 

The original project adopted by Congress by the river and harbor 
act of June 13, 1902, contemplated dredging Whatcom Creek water- 
way to a depth of 12 feet at mean lower low water and 200 feet wide 
from deep water as far as the railroad bridge, a distance of 1,200 
feet, and to its full width (363.2 feet) inside this bridge, a farther 
distance of 1,950 feet. The estimated cost was $80,000. 

The river and harbor act of June 13, 1902, provided — 

That no part of this appropriation (.$23,000) shall be expended until pro- 
vision shall have been made, satisfactory to the Secretary of War, to prevent the 
deposit in the channel to be improved of sawdust and refuse from the mills. 

The above requirement having been complied with the Secretary of 
War authorized the expenditure of the appropriation for the execu- 
tion of the work on June 9, 1903. Work was done under two separate 
contracts and was completed on April 22, 1906. 

A channel 200 feet wide and 12 feet deep at low water, with turn- 
ing basin at inner end, was dredged under contract. The channel 
extends the full length of the waterway, and the basin at the inner 
end is 330 feet wide and 2,570 feet long. 

The work contemplated by this project was completed at somewhat 
less than the estimated cost, and a larger amount of dredging was 
done than was expected with the funds available. The amount ex- 
pended on this project was $57,673.98. 

14. COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN WENATCHEE AND BRIDGEPORT, 
WASH. 

The project adopted by the river and harbor act approved August 
18, 1894, for the improvement of the Columbia River from Rock 
Island Rapids to Foster Creek Rapids, Wash., included the part of 
the river between Wenatchee and Bridgeport. This project contem- 
plated the removal of obstructive rocks, bowlders, and reefs, and the 
placing of deadmen, snubbing posts, and lines for lining over difficult 
and swift reaches. By the expenditure of $8,005.20 obstructive rocks 
were removed at Rocky Reach and Methow Rapids, and an anchor- 
ing boom with snubbing posts and deadmen with lines were placed 
at Entiat Rapids. 



APPENDIX. 2007 

HISTORICAL SUMMARY GIVING SCOPE OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS FOR 
IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS IN THE PORTO RICO 
DISTRICT. 



SPANISH PROJECT FOR SAN JUAN HARBOR, PORTO RICO. 

The original condition of this harbor and the artificial changes 
effected may best be understood by a reference to the accompanying 
outline maps. 

Fig. 1 shows the conditions as they existed in 1883 before any work 
was done by the Spanish port authorities. 

Fig. 2 shows the areas dredged by the Spanish port authorities dur- 
ing the period 1887 to 1894. 

Fig. 3 shows the conditions in 1902 before work was begun by the 
United States. 

The city of San Juan is located on a coral island of the same name. 
The harbor of San Juan lies back of this island. For several miles 
eastward of San Juan Island the sea frontage of Porto Rico con- 
sists of low sand dunes between which and the high upland are a 
series of lagoons and swamps which drain into San Juan Bay. 

The main channel of entrance to San Juan Harbor lies close to the 
western shore of San Juan Island from the sea to the salient of La 
Puntilla, where the harbor proper is assumed to begin. La Puntilla 
was originally a mangrove swamp, such as surrounds the greater part 
of the harbor, and was reclaimed with material dredged from the 
entrance channel and from the harbor. The ocean swell along San 
Juan Island from Morro Point to La Puntilla prevents the use of 
this shore for shipping purposes. The developed water front lies 
along the protected south shore of San Juan Island eastward from 
La Puntilla. 

From the best available information the entrance channel in 1883 
had a least depth of 26 feet and a least width of about 300 feet. 
Inside the harbor there was a considerable area available for vessels 
drawing 23 feet or less. 

An improvement of the harbor was commenced in 1889, and be- 
tween that date and the American occupation in 1898 a total of about 
$647,000 was expended for dredging and for bulkheading and re- 
claiming adjacent swamp lands. The proceeds from the sale of 
reclaimed lands was utilized in making further improvements. 
Under these expenditures about 800,000 cubic yards were removed 
from the entrance channel, from the edge of La Puntilla, from Punta 
Larga and Yufri Shoals, and from immediately in front of the bulk- 
heads. As a result of this work there existed in 1898 an entrance 
channel with a least depth of 25 feet over a least width of 400 feet. 
The harbor area available to vessels drawing 24 feet or less had been 
increased to 56 acres, and berths along the bulkheads had been 
deepened to receive vessels drawing 18 feet. 

From 1898 until the existing project was adopted in 1907 no 
further work of harbor improvement was done in San Juan Harbor, 
except the erection by the New York & Porto Rico Steamship Co. of 
a pier which contributed a much needed facility for transferring 
freight and passengers without lightering. 

A channel exists at the eastern end of the island connecting the 
sea with San Antonio Channel and the harbor proper. Owing to the 



2008 EEPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 

influence of the prevailing easterly winds, the elevation of the sea 
level at this second inlet is sufficient to establish and maintain at 
practically all stages of tide through it and San Antonio Channel 
a gentle current which sweeps along the main harbor front and tends 
to improve the sanitary condition of this part of the harbor. Its 
influence upon the sanitary condition of San Antonio Channel and 
the harbor is its chief value. As a navigable channel it has little 
value, present or prospective, except for small craft. It has a depth 
of not over 5 feet and is obstructed by reefs, isolated rocks, and three 
bridges without draws, having not over 6 feet vertical clearance. 



_C3 OF ENGINEERS, U.S. ARMY. 

Ficj.l 
Ji 



fc^gy^GSo- 




Bay or San Juan 

PORTO RICO 
in 1883 



k_* 




500 



I * * 



looom. 

-j 



FT- 1000 2000 3000 4000 FT. 



more: 

Pepths ore jodicofed f/?us: 

8m, ~e0.Zft 

0m.-fS.7 " 



sdggfa Peffa Chorine/ 



House Doc. No. <J / ; 64th Cong., 1st Sess. 



WAR DEPARTMENT 



CORPS OF ENGINEERS, U. 5. ARMY. 



Rq.l 




Win Pe.na Channel 



House Doc. No. <J I ; 64th Cong., 1st Sess 



:ORPa OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 



rig. 2 




Port of San Juan 

PORTO RICO 

Showing the work done 

between !887and July 1894 

Area dredged to 9 m show thus I 
Area dredged to l m ihownffws 1 



looom. 500 

I i L A — i — A — 



13 



JL-JL- i k 



IKra 



House Doc, No. <J 7 ; 64th Cong., fst Sess. 



WAR DEPARTMENT 



CORPS OF ENGINEERS, U.S. ARMY. 




COUIMLEfl T D£PTIi^ . 

Sm. - Z9-5 Ft 
Cm. ~e6£ •■ 

?m. = e3.o " 
&m. = /$.? ■■ 



Port of San Juan 

PORTO RICO 
Showing the work done 
between I887and July 1894 
Area dredged to 9 m shown thus I 
Area dredged to l m shown thus I 



House Doc. No. <// ; 64th Cong., 1st Sess. 



WA 



COf ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 



nq-3 



c/v 



n 




iraflore: 




Harbor of San Juan 

^^ PORTO RICO 
\^r\ in 1902 



t. 



) f. o 500 iooo m 

%. i i i * h k k I i I i 

Ift. 9 iqoo zopo 3opo ft. 



s 



No. 7/ ; 64th Cong., 1st Sess. 



WAR DEPARTMENT 



CORPS OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY. 




; 64th Cong., 1st Sess. 



isiasr 



■ ■'- •••■'! 






(Muffin 



m 




tiui 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



f 

020 590 710 5 



